1 2 BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES - The Official Web … · 2 BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES 3 PUBLIC HEARING 4 5 -----x 6 IN RE: 7 NEW JERSEY'S ENERGY MASTER PLAN, ... 8 comments that are

file:////Nwkna02/Users/Raines/My%20Documents/1Web%20Assets/Post/ItemsToPost/1%20post/8-17-15.txt[11/5/2015 10:32:48 AM]

1

1 STATE OF NEW JERSEY

2 BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITIES

3 PUBLIC HEARING

4

5 --------------------------------x

6 IN RE:

7 NEW JERSEY'S ENERGY MASTER PLAN,

8 UPDATE TO THE 2011 ENERGY MASTER

9 PLAN.

10 --------------------------------x

11

12

13

14 LOCATION: Richard Stockton University 101 Vera King Farris Drive 15 Galloway Township, New Jersey DATE: Monday, August 17, 2015 16 TIME: 1:00 p.m.

17 BEFORE: Richard Mroz, President, Board of Public Utilities. 18

19

20

21

22

23 J.H. BUEHRER & ASSOCIATES 24 1613 Beaver Dam Road Point Pleasant Boro, New Jersey 08742


25 732-295-1975

2

1 T R A N S C R I P T of the above-entitled

2 matter by and before GERALDINE ADINOLFI, a Certified

3 Court Reporter, License Number 30XI00228000 and

4 Notary Public of the State of New Jersey, Notary

5 Number 2273630.

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24


25

3

1 PRESIDENT MROZ: Good afternoon my name

2 is Richard Mroz. I'm the President of the New

3 Jersey Board of Public Utilities and I'll be serving

4 as the hearing officer for today's hearing.

5 Pursuant to the open Public Meetings Act, the New

6 Jersey Board of Public Utilities has provided notice

7 of three scheduled public hearings to solicit

8 comments for an update to it's 2011 Energy Master

9 Plan.

10 The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities

11 has public notice has been given pursuant to the

12 open public meetings act, notice having been posted

13 at the Board's offices and having been delivered to

14 the Department of State and newspapers of broad

15 circulation within the state. Notice also was

16 posted on the Board's website and the State Energy

17 Master Plan website.

18 I will ask you to now stand for the

19 Pledge of Allegiance.

20 PRESIDENT MROZ: Again, welcome. I

21 would like to thank Stockton University for hosting

22 us. We are here to take comments on updating New

23 Jersey's Energy Master Plan that was released by

24 Governor Chris Christie in December of 2011. This


25 is the third and final of three hearings the Board

4

1 will host. My fellow Commissioners Mary Anna Holden

2 and Joe Fiordaliso are joining us today. I don't

3 see Commissioner Fiordaliso yet. But I know he is

4 here. So it's good to see you, and welcome,

5 Commissioner. We also have a number of staff

6 people, including those sitting with me, at the

7 table who are here to digest and understand the

8 comments that are presented, and they will be part

9 of the process as we go forward.

10 We are also welcoming the comments we

11 receive here today at this hearing, but written

12 comments as well information on where to send

13 written comments via e-mail or regular mail can be

14 found on the Energy Master Plan web site. That wen

15 site is www.nj.gov/emp. All comments must be

16 submitted by the close of business on Wednesday

17 August 4, 2015. The 2011 Energy Master Plan Master

18 Plan is a strategic vision for the use management

19 and development of energy in New Jersey over the

20 following decade, the specific recommendations in

21 the 2011 plan focus on both initiatives and

22 mechanisms which set forth energy policy to drive

23 the State's economy forward, while maintaining New

24 Jersey's strong commitment to preserving and


25 protecting the State's environment. We request that

5

1 comments be focused on the specific goals and

2 recommendations in the 2011 Energy Master Plan

3 and/or regarding several areas that have emerged

4 since 2011.

5 The 2011 Energy Master Plan contains

6 five over arching goals. First, to drive down the

7 cost of energy for all customers. Second, to

8 promote a diverse portfolio of new, clean, in-state

9 generation. Third, to reward energy efficiency and

10 energy conservation and reduce peak demand. Next to

11 capitalize on emerging technologies for

12 transportation, power production and to maintain

13 support for renewable energy portfolio standard of

14 22.5 percent of energy from renewable sources by

15 2021.

16 In addition, to the overarching

17 goals, the 2011 Energy Master Plan contains 31

18 specific policy recommendations that fall into four

19 general sections to expand in-state electricity

20 resources, cost-effective renewable resources,

21 promoting cost-effective conservation and energy

22 efficiency, and supporting the development of

23 innovative energy technology.

24 Now, New Jersey has a good story to


25 tell. It has a balanced portfolio of energy

6

1 resources from generation, distribution and use this

2 includes nuclear, natural gas, solar, fuel cells

3 emergence of wind and new emerging technology. New

4 Jersey has shown good progress toward achieving the

5 five overarching goals. And many of 31 policy

6 recommendations. Overall, New Jersey has lower

7 energy costs while at the same time is advancing

8 energy efficiency, demand response and renewable

9 energy.

10 The State has fallen from a very high

11 energy cost state. In fact, according to the U.S.

12 Information Administration's ranking of state

13 residential retail natural gas prices, New Jersey's

14 ranking has fallen from 17, the highest in the

15 country to, in 2010, to 50 the lowest cost state in

16 the country. New Jersey's decline in EIA state

17 ranking for the cost of electricity while not as

18 dramatic has followed the same downward trend. In

19 2010 New Jersey was ranged as 4th highest retail

20 price for electricity for the residential sector the

21 state now ranks 10th in EIA's most recent report.

22 While New Jersey's average

23 residential retail electricity price ranking fell

24 six spots. More needs to be done to bring down the


25 costs further for all customers. The natural gas

7

1 infrastructure for New Jersey has allowed New Jersey

2 to take advantage of low gas prices providing

3 residents and businesses with the benefits of lower

4 energy costs. In addition to the lower cost of

5 energy, the State's electricity energy resources are

6 diverse and cleaner. New Jersey was recently ranked

7 46th in emissions from electric generation, despite

8 being the 22nd largest electric generating state.

9 This is a direct result of the State's current

10 resource mix of nuclear, natural gas and renewables.

11 New Jersey continues to meet its

12 renewable energy portfolio standards, which this

13 year requires nearly 15 percent of all electricity

14 consumed in the state to be recognized as coming

15 from renewable sources, through Class 1 and Class 2

16 renewables and SRECs. With the State's total

17 installed solar capacity surpassing the 1.5 gigawatt

18 milestone, solar accounts were almost 3 percent of

19 state's generation mix. And according to the Solar

20 Energy Industry's Association's State ranking, New

21 Jersey continues to be ranks Number 3 as having the

22 third highest amount of installed solar behind only

23 California and Arizona. New Jersey has also had

24 success in reducing energy usage through its support


25 for demand reduction and new technology.

8

1 New and changing challenges need to

2 be met to continue the growth and implementation of

3 energy efficiency technology in a market that's

4 still growing but reaching maturity. To this end,

5 we can engage with our electric distribution

6 companies and gas distribution companies in an

7 efforts to assess the relationship between the

8 energy efficiency programs, programs operated by the

9 New Jersey Clean Energy Program at the Board of

10 Public Utilities and those run by the electric and

11 gas distribution companies. This analysis will help

12 to inform the Board of decisions on how best to

13 coordinate energy efficiency efforts for the benefit

14 of the ratepayer.

15 As was mentioned by some speakers at

16 the recent public hearing last week at Seton Hall

17 Law School, construction codes play an important

18 role in energy efficiency efforts. And the

19 Department of Community Affairs, the agency

20 responsibile for adoption of construction codes has

21 recently proposed adopting the international energy

22 construction codes in June, and will be publishing

23 notice of final adoption in the New Jersey Register

24 in September. According to the DCA, the codes will


25 increase energy efficiency in commercial buildings

9

1 and residential properties by 27 and 16 percent

2 respectively above current codes. While overall

3 there has been much progress on the implementation

4 of the goals of the 2011 Energy Master Plan, there

5 is always room for improvement. For instance, New

6 Jersey is on target to meet goals for new

7 distributed generation. However, the amount of new,

8 combined heat and power being developed is not on

9 target to meet its goal.

10 Since the release of the 2011 EMP,

11 New Jersey has suffered devastating damage from the

12 impacts of weather event, such as Superstorm Sandy.

13 The Christie Administration has made it a priority

14 to improve energy resiliency and emergency

15 preparedness and response. Therefore, we will

16 address these high priority areas in updating the

17 EMP. Potential policy recommendations in the new

18 section would be based on New Jersey's plan for

19 action in the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy, and may

20 include the following: First protecting critical

21 energy infrastructure, second, improving the

22 electric distribution companies' emergency

23 preparedness and response, third, increasing the use

24 of micro-grid technology and applications


25 distributed energy resources, and last creating

10

1 long-term financing for resiliency measures such as

2 those through the energy resilience bank.

3 Now, before we hear from our speakers

4 today, I would like to set forth a few expectations

5 for the hearing. So you know that we are hoping to

6 get everyone's comments here and give them a chance

7 to speak. We have a good number of people

8 registered to speak, and I expect others in the

9 audience might want to comment after they have heard

10 the registered speakers. If you wish to speak and

11 have not already done, so please see the folks at

12 the table outside, and make sure you are on the

13 speaker's list.

14 I will call the list of speakers in

15 order from the preregistered list then those that

16 have signed up today. To provide the of opportunity

17 for everyone to speak, I would ask you to keep your

18 remarks to three minutes, keeping within that time

19 limit will help insure everyone has an opportunity

20 to speak today. I understand this is a relatively

21 short time period for you to convey your thoughts.

22 So I would ask you to keep your focus on the goals

23 and recommendation of the 2011 Energy Master Plan

24 and those emerging issues since 2011. If there's a


25 specific portion of the plan that you take issue

11

1 with factually or as a matter of policy, please

2 state it and state your recommendation. However, I

3 would expect that comments offered here today are

4 factual and objective. And that everyone respects

5 the speaker's right to make comments and that they

6 are not met with disrespect, animosity or other

7 disruptive behavior.

8 In the event that there is any

9 behavior that I feel is disruptive, I will tell you

10 that I will adjourn this hearing until such time as

11 I determine the decorum can be restored. If you

12 have a written statement that will be provided to

13 us, please give us a synopsis. There's no need for

14 you to read the entire statement into the record,

15 and the written statement will serve as your

16 comments. For participants who have already spoken

17 at other hearings, I would ask you to not

18 necessarily repeat your comments from the other

19 hearings, but to be succinct in any additional

20 comments you may have.

21 We are here today to listen. No

22 decisions will be made today. And we will keep

23 questions to a minimum, and I will only do so for

24 purpose of clarification.


25 After today, we will be posting all

12

1 comments that have been made at the public hearings

2 today and the other two days, and they will be

3 posted on the EMP website. Once again, the address

4 for that is www.NJ.gov/emp.

5 And the next steps in this process

6 are such that once we conclude this hearing, we will

7 be reconvening the committee of my colleagues within

8 the administration that form the EMP review

9 committee, and that includes my colleagues, the

10 Commissioner of the DEP, the Commissioner of the DCA

11 Commissioner of Department of Health and Senior

12 Services, and the DOT and treasury, and we will

13 begin reviewing all the comments received. And

14 process of updating the plan will proceed. We will

15 not establish time frame for announcing the update

16 to the plan until we have been able to hear all

17 comments and review the written comments. And we

18 need time to digest them for internal consideration.

19 Once we have done so, we will announce and provide a

20 time frame for final notice and updates to the 2011

21 EMP.

22 Now I have a list of speakers who

23 have preregistered and those that have come today,

24 who have indicated they want to speak. What I will


25 do is I will just give everyone a sort of advanced

13

1 notice of who will come to speak, so you can be

2 prepared, so I will indicate probably the next two

3 or three people that will speak and call them up,

4 again, in order as you have registered.

5 So the first three speakers who have

6 indicated they will speak from the preregistered

7 list are Stefanie Brand, our call colleague from

8 Rate Counsel, Paul Gallagher from Fishermen's Energy

9 and Pattie Cronhiem from Hopewell Township Citizens

10 Against Penn East Pipeline.

11 Ms. Brand, good afternoon and good to

12 see you.

13 MS. BRAND: Thank you, very much.

14 I'm going to be brief today, because as you know I

15 have been at all three hearings. We did have a

16 written statement that we already gave to the court

17 reporter. I do have copies for anybody in the

18 audience today, if you weren't at the Newark

19 hearing. We also have posted comments on the web

20 site, and we will be providing written comments by

21 the deadline that the Board has set.

22 I did want to hit a few highlights,

23 just so I can under score them once again. And the

24 first is we'd love the opportunity, once there is an


25 update, to provide written comments on that. We

14

1 don't know what it's going to say. We appreciate

2 the opportunity to give input before its done, but

3 we would also like to give input once it's out.

4 I also, we talked about where we are

5 in terms of energy prices. As I have mentioned

6 before, while it's great that our electricity prices

7 have remained stable, we are still Number 10 in the

8 country. The problem is other people are going up

9 and passing us on the list. But it is good our

10 electricity prices are staying stable and our

11 natural gas price are dropping.

12 I would urge everybody, don't rest on

13 your laurels. We need to keep stay conscious of

14 what we are spending, and how it impacts ratepayers.

15 In terms of the storm resiliency;

16 that is obviously an issue of great importance,

17 particularly in this part of the state. We don't

18 know yet whether the money that is being authorized

19 by the Board of Public Utilities, including the

20 1 billion dollar Energy Strong program will work.

21 We haven't had a statewide storm to test it,

22 thankfully, so we don't know. But I would

23 definitely urge the Board to not simply throw money

24 at the problem, but dig in and make sure we are


25 spending money in a way that will help us in the

15

1 future.

2 We have had one storm down here since

3 then. I think what it showed us was there is

4 certainly an issue in terms of communications. I

5 would hope that the Board will utilize its authority

6 over the telecommunications industry, as well as the

7 electric and utility industry to make sure that we

8 ever adequate communications during storms. I think

9 that is extremely important.

10 In terms of the Energy Master Plan

11 from 2011, I think actually there is a success story

12 to be told about solar. We talked about jump

13 starting the solar industry. I think that in fact

14 has happened. Installations have been going up, and

15 the industry is quite healthy. The costs of solar

16 have gone down significantly. That has allowed them

17 to -- with existing ratepayer funds, to keep going

18 and to keep installing. And I would just urge that

19 there be no further commitment of ratepayer money

20 until we see what the future brings. If the costs

21 keep going down like they have been, I think that

22 what we have committed so far is certainly enough.

23 I do think that we need to do more on

24 energy efficiency. We certainly are trying.


25 There's definitely some movement afoot to get a

16

1 single administrator of the OCE program, to work

2 with utilities, to dig in and see how their programs

3 are working and how they can compliment the OCE

4 programs.

5 That is all I have. Thanks.

6 PRESIDENT MROZ: Thank you.

7 Paul Gallagher of Fishermen's Energy.

8 MR. GALLAGHER: Good afternoon. My

9 name is Paul Gallagher. I'm chief operating officer

10 and general counsel for Fishermen's Energy.

11 Good afternoon, President Mroz,

12 Commissioners Fiordaliso and Holden.

13 Congratulations on your reconfirmation.

14 One point of housekeeping was that

15 the public notice in your statements, you said that

16 the written comments were to be due on Monday August

17 26 -- or maybe, Wednesday, August 24. But in any

18 event next Monday is the 24th, next Wednesday is the

19 26th. I'm not sure which date you want these

20 comments. We will get ours in by Monday.

21 PRESIDENT MROZ: The date is August

22 24 for the dead line.

23 MR. GALLAGHER: Monday, but not

24 Wednesday. It says Wednesday in the notice.



17

1 MR. GALLAGHER: I was at the hearing

2 on Thursday and I heard testimony about the lack of

3 support of regional chambers of commerce for

4 offshore wind. I have written comments and attached

5 them as a 2014 policy position taken by the Greater

6 Atlantic City Chamber in support of Fishermen's

7 Energy Atlantic City project. Also attached is an

8 Atlantic County Board of Chosen Freeholders

9 resolution urging the New Jersey Board of Public

10 Utilities to approve the Fishermen's Energy wind

11 farm project.

12 Five years ago this Wednesday the

13 Governor's office issued a press release on the

14 signing of the Offshore Wind Economy Development

15 Act for 2010; quote, The Offshore Wind Economic

16 Development Act will provide New Jersey with an

17 opportunity to leverage our vast resources and

18 innovative technologies to allow businesses to

19 engage in new and emerging sectors of the energy

20 industry. Developing New Jersey's renewable energy

21 resources and industry is critical to our State's

22 manufacturing and technology future. My

23 administration will maintain a strong commitment to

24 utilizing energy as industry in our efforts to make


25 our state a home for growth, as well as a national

18

1 leader in the wind power movement.

2 President Kennedy told us the time to

3 repair the roof, is when the sun is shining. And

4 his predecessor in office Dwight Eisenhower pointed

5 out that plans are nothing, planning is everything.

6 The Energy Master Plan on page 70

7 cites the Offshore Wind Economic Development Act and

8 directs the BPU to develop an OREC program to

9 support these 1100 megawatts of generation in

10 qualified offshore wind projects. It also

11 authorizes the BPU to accept applications from

12 qualified offshore wind projects, sets forth a

13 criteria to be used by the BPU in reviewing the

14 project's applications and authorizes the EPA to

15 provide up to 100 million dollars in tax credits for

16 qualified clean energy facilities and wind energy

17 zones.

18 At page 37 the EMP again cites that

19 OWEDA calls out for 1100 megawatts of installed

20 capacity of offshore wind generation out the outer

21 continental shelf in the Atlantic Ocean, like solar

22 the plan says, the offshore wind position is

23 designed as a carve out from the total S 1

24 requirement.


25 Page 191 the EMP states: Offshore

19

1 wind has been supported by the Christie

2 administration for a number of reasons. It is

3 renewable, has no carbon output, has the potential

4 to develop a manufacturing and is support industry

5 within the state. Thereby creating direct, indirect

6 and induced economic benefits for many years to

7 come.

8 OWEDA is based on all three of these

9 elements being recognized in the review of the cost

10 benefit analysis of any proposed offshore wind

11 project. Although the capital costs of offshore

12 wind is roughly twice the capital cost of onshore

13 shore wind, offshore wind has higher more consistent

14 capacity factors than onshore wind, thus helping to

15 reduce the net costs of the producing energy NRECs

16 from offshore locations. Capital costs increase

17 with water depth. So the further away from shore

18 and the deeper the installations the more expensive

19 the wind plant. Coastal and shallow water

20 installations have the advantage of offshore wind

21 characteristics at a lower cost.

22 The EMP also at page 108 pointed out

23 that the Board in February of 2011 adopted rules for

24 offshore wind to codify the statutory of OWEDA,


25 provide a framework for approving applications for

20

1 projects and that they will readopt the subsequent.

2 The applicant requirement includes that cost benefit

3 analysis as well as proposed OREC pricing methods

4 and schedule. The burden remains on the applicant

5 to propose OREC prices. It is assumed that the

6 pricing would represent the projects revenue

7 requirement after tax credits and subsidies minus

8 the estimated value of spot energy market capacity

9 prices.

10 If the BPU finds the proposed OREC

11 prices too high the BPU has jurisdiction to approve

12 a lower OREC price that would allow the applicant to

13 satisfy the cost benefits standards.

14 Margaret Thatcher's advice was plan

15 your work, then work your plan. The offshore wind

16 industry supports the work that was planned in the

17 2011 and followed the road map and it only asks that

18 the State work its own plan. We were pleased by the

19 announcement that the BPU will be retaining

20 consultants to finally draft OREC regulations that

21 were called for in the 2010 legislation.

22 One only need to look Maryland, which

23 with the right consultants drafted and implemented

24 OREC regulations in less 8 months, while we have


25 been waiting in New Jersey since 2011.

21

1 As pointed out on page 70 of the

2 Master Plan, OWEDA authorize BPU accept applications

3 for projects. It has exercised that authority only

4 once for a project that it's now rejected three

5 times. We believe that BPU should open a window and

6 accept new application for both inshore and offshore

7 projects. It may be that the Federal Waters project

8 need to wait for final OREC rules, but expect the

9 Federal Government move forward in the near future

10 to issue leases off of New Jersey. This

11 administration is nearing the home stretch and the

12 offshore leasing process will be completed well

13 before they leave office.

14 I would be remiss if I did suggest

15 Fishermen's Energy Atlantic City project is fully

16 permitted, satisfies the EMP criteria, complies with

17 each and every element of OWEDA, has won a 51

18 million dollar US Department of Energy grant and

19 should be approved.

20 As I pointed out earlier, if the BPU

21 finds the proposed OREC prices too high, then the

22 BPU has jurisdiction to approve a lower OREC price

23 that will allow the applicant to satisfy the cost

24 benefits standards.


25 If the BPU had a Patron Saint, it

22

1 would be Thomas Edison. Being busy, does not always

2 mean real work, he said. The object of all work is

3 production or accomplishment and to either of these

4 ends, there must be forethought, system, planning

5 intelligence, honest purpose as well as

6 perspiration. Seeming to do is not doing.

7 Unfortunately, we can't ignore the

8 harsh reality of Mike Tyson. Everyone has a plan

9 until getting punched in the mouth. Climate change

10 is real. Don't rewrite the plan; implement it.

11 Issue rights, open a window, and approve the

12 Fishermen's project and thank you for your time.


14 The next speaker is Patty Cronhiem

15 from Hopewell Township Citizens Against Penn

16 Pipeline.

17 MS. CRONHIEM: Thank you,

18 Commissioners for the opportunity to speak today and

19 for having these public hearings about New Jersey's

20 energy future. I'm Patty Cronhiem and like many

21 thousands of New Jerseyans, we are defending our

22 communities from pipelines, I have become more

23 engaged in New Jersey's energy issues. I would like

24 to add my voice to the others, you've heard in the


25 past two weeks, including my colleagues at New

23

1 Jersey's Conservation Foundation, and say the

2 priorities in the Energy Master Plan, should be one

3 energy conservation and efficiency, two rapid

4 transition to clean energy alternatives. And three,

5 consideration of proposed pipelines in a

6 comprehensive manner that evaluates total need and

7 cumulate impact.

8 Simply, put New Jersey can't win the

9 race to renewable by dragging fossil fuels behind

10 them. I would like to commend had Board for your

11 announcement last week that you are engaging

12 consultant to move forward towards the develop of

13 offshore wind farms. This is a wonderful step in

14 reducing the state's reliance on fossil fuels.

15 Thank you.

16 We need a concrete, comprehensive

17 plan that includes all forms of renewables to

18 transition away from fossil fuels. I know the EMP

19 support this goal, but the question is how do get

20 there. As mentioned by the last speaker, New Jersey

21 doesn't have a shabby intellectual heritage. I am

22 going to add Einstein to that.

23 It's time for us to build on that

24 past. Let's innovate, create and demonstrate.


25 Innovate by harnessing the great minds in our

24

1 educational and business communities. Create, the

2 economic engine that will lead us to future

3 prosperity and demonstrate the leadership in our

4 great state.

5 New Jersey has the ability to develop

6 big ideas such as the wind ferris wheel that has

7 recently been proposed by the Dutch in the port city

8 of Rotterham. This exciting multi-use project will

9 not only be the ultimate in ecotourism, but will

10 generate electricity for 1,000 homes, soak up solar

11 energy, collect and recycle water and also serve as

12 a hotel and home with 72 apartments. This is the

13 kind of innovative project that thinks outside the

14 box, and invigorates and excites economists.

15 New Jersey can also use energy

16 innovation to become a leader in job creation. On

17 average more jobs are created for each unit of

18 electricity generated from renewable sources than

19 from fossil fuels. The UCS is concerned by and is

20 conducing an analysis of the economic benefits of

21 just what 25 percent renewable energy standard by

22 the 2025 would achieve. They found that such policy

23 would create more than three times as many jobs a

24 producing an equivalent amount of electricity from


25 fossil fuels. Resulting in the benefit of 297,000

25

1 new jobs in 2025. The UCS analysis also found in

2 addition to the jobs directly created in the

3 renewable energy industry, growth in the renewable

4 energy industry creates positive ripple effects as

5 well.

6 Industries in the renewable energy

7 supply chains will benefit and unrelated local

8 businesses will also benefit from the increased

9 household and business incomes. They estimate the

10 benefits of 25 percent renewable standard will

11 contribute to over 290 billion in economic

12 development, and 64.3 billion dollars in lower

13 electricity and natural gas bills for consumers by

14 2025. That savings will grow to 95.5 billion

15 dollars by 2030. Let's aim at New Jersey for a 30

16 percent renewable portfolio standard by 2020.

17 I would also like to urge Board to

18 reconsider its support for construction of new gas

19 pipelines. The need for additional pipelines has

20 not been shown by anyone other than the companies

21 that will profit from them. We are submitting a

22 report on the polar vortex, based on the recent

23 analysis of flow data serving PJM East during polar

24 vortex events. This analysis strongly suggests that


25 several of the five interstate natural gas pipelines

26

1 never fully utilized their existing capacity. And

2 had availability, even as spot market gas prices

3 were skyrocketing due to the perceived demand in

4 excess of amount which can be delivered during

5 emergencies.

6 During the polar vortex the problem

7 was as much or more about pipeline responsiveness,

8 than it was about pipeline capacity.

9 I will close by say investing in

10 construction of new pipelines throws good money

11 after bad. We are on cusp of an exiting era of

12 truly clean energy innovation. Let's put our money

13 where our hope is; renewables. Thank you.

14 PRESIDENT MROZ: Thank you for your

15 comments.

16 The next several speakers are Nancy

17 Hedinger, I apologize if I get the name wrong Adje

18 Mensah and Ron Hutchinson.

19 So Ms. Hedinger, good afternoon.

20 MS. HEDINGER: Good afternoon. My

21 name is Nancy Heddinger, H-e-d-d-i-n-g-e-r. And I'm

22 the president of the League of Women Voters of New

23 Jersey. The League of women voters is guided by a

24 principle of active, informed participation by


25 citizen of government. We are a non-partisan

27

1 political organization, not an environmental

2 organization. And our comments directly address the

3 impact of 2011 Master Plan on the residents of New

4 Jersey.

5 First we are disappointed in the lack

6 of opportunity for significant public testimony.

7 These hearings, held in August with little notice

8 are not in the best interest of good government.

9 All efforts should be made to insure citizen

10 participation and promote a fair, transparent, open

11 public process. The League of Women Voters of New

12 Jersey agrees with Rate Counsel and asks that going

13 forward you make a commitment to robust

14 participation, and allow adequate and time notice

15 for testimony and comments on the resulting 2015

16 Energy Master Plan developed pursuant to these

17 hearings.

18 With the damaging effects of

19 Superstorm Sandy still evident in many parts of our

20 coastal cities, we cannot pretend our electric

21 distribution system is adequate for dealing with

22 future weather events. Increased warming, and

23 resulting sea level rise, already being observed in

24 the amount of and frequency of nuisance flooding,


25 guaranty that similar and even more severe storms

28

1 lie ahead. The public deserves much more

2 resiliency, power outages of up to 12 days in

3 widespread areas of our state, with even ordinary

4 storms are not acceptable.

5 The League of Women Voters is well

6 aware that no source energy exists without some

7 cost. It takes energy to create energy. However,

8 we need to educate the policy makers, legislators

9 and the public about the need to look at energy from

10 a cradle to grave perspective. Including historic

11 subsidies, as well as health and environmental

12 costs.

13 Taking external and indirect costs

14 into account, will necessarily result in a different

15 ordering of priorities, versus a simple cost-benefit

16 analysis that looks only at direct costs. So we

17 stop undervaluing renewables and overvaluing fossil

18 fuels energy generation. To this end, we again ask

19 that the word "sustainable" as opposed to

20 cost-effective be the most repeated word in the new

21 energy master plan.

22 Additionally, when we testified in

23 the draft 2011 plan four years ago, the League noted

24 goals of the draft represented a step backward from


25 the ambitious goals of the 2008 plan. Which stated,

29

1 quote: New Jersey's faced with an opportunity to

2 transform its current energy system from one that

3 will threaten to undermine the security of our

4 economy, to one that is responsibly efficient,

5 clean, affordable and reliable.

6 The goal of the state should not only

7 be to reduce costs but to encourage residents to

8 reduce energy consumption and encourage conservation

9 and greater efficiency and support renewable sources

10 of energy.

11 The 2011 EMP lists measures such as

12 smart grid, smart metering, energy efficient

13 appliances, and constant public education on how we

14 can be integral to the plan's success. Yet the

15 Clean Energy Fund has been cut by over a billion

16 dollars. Further since the removal of New Jersey

17 from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in 2011

18 we have lost out on the opportunity to earn over 200

19 million in sales of CO2 allowances. Money that

20 should have been used to develop clean energy

21 technology and subsidy for homes and business to

22 make them more efficient and less costly to heat and

23 cool.

24 The new Energy Master Plan must


25 prioritize funding for energy conservation and

30

1 efficiency. The 2008 Energy Master Plan made us an

2 example to other states by emphasizing plans to move

3 ahead with aggressive development in sola and

4 offshore wind power. Sources of energy derived

5 exclusively within the state.

6 As others have mentioned the goal of

7 generating 1100 megawatts of offshore wind capacity

8 along our cost is stilt an audible one. We must now

9 follow the lead of Rhode Island, which has just

10 broken ground on the northeast's first offshore wind

11 project.

12 And since the last Energy Master Plan

13 was approved, there has been great improvements in

14 the capability of battery storage for renewables,

15 reducing many claims of intermittency problems with

16 renewable energy sources. We urge everybody to

17 return to the ambitious solar and offshore wind

18 development goals of the 2008 Energy Master Plan and

19 establish a renewable portfolio standards and

20 subsidies for renewable energy in the revised the

21 Master Plan.

22 We must look beyond 2020 and not

23 reduce 2008 goal of 30 percent energy for renewables

24 to the current 22.5 percent, but expand them by


25 approving sustainable renewable energy choices, so

31

1 that we can reach the goal of achieving 80 percent

2 of our from energy from the renewable sources as set

3 forth in the Global Warming Response Act of 2007.

4 The League recognizes that all energy

5 comes with costs and no form of energy is free from

6 risk. But this body has an obligation to protect

7 our residents from possible contamination of our

8 water, land and air. The 2011 Master Plan emphasis

9 the benefits of natural gas, with no reference to

10 the dangers of extricating gas from under shell

11 deposits, the consumptive use of water, the

12 difficulty of disposing of waste from fracking

13 operations, and the risk to human health and the

14 environment of transporting natural gas by rail,

15 barge, pipeline infrastructure.

16 Once again the League asks for a

17 moratorium of on hydrofracking the Delaware River

18 basin, until there is an unbiased scientific study

19 completed. This is no time to be calling for

20 cost-effective solutions when long-term lifecycle

21 impacts image are not factored into the equation.

22 The risks are too great. As has been pointed out

23 before, this administration will be distant memory

24 in 20 year's time, but the residents of this state


25 deserve to know their future is not at danger,

32

1 because of decisions that they may laid out in the

2 short-term.

3 And I wanted to add a footnote, I'm

4 not sure if it was mentioned, because I wasn't at

5 the other hearings, if anyone raised the fact that

6 last year at this time, Senator Smith brought

7 together a number of stakeholders to work on

8 transitioning New Jersey to a more renewable future.

9 It included industry environmental, community groups

10 and they came up with, well, they looked four

11 things: Mitigating solar development, volatility,

12 achieving global response act goals, reconsidering

13 incentives for Class 1 renewables, and decoupling

14 utility regulations. And last July 10th, the

15 working group presented the reports to the Senate

16 Energy Environment Committee Hearing and you can get

17 those transcripts. We are on the Global Warming

18 Task Force, and in our report it recommends, makes

19 recommendations in the areas of transportation, land

20 use, heating and buildings and energy production and

21 distribution.

22 There is a lot of good stuff in those

23 reports. So you should get ahold of them.

24 Thank you.



33

1 comments.

2 The next speaker is Adje Mensah. I

3 might be pronouncing that wrong. I understand you

4 have couple call colleagues who registered, but they

5 are not going to speak.

6 MR. MENSAH: That's correct.

7 Good afternoon, my name is Adje

8 Mensah. My firm A. Mensah is developer and operator

9 of solar and battery storage projects. To date we

10 have over 30 projects across New Jersey, Maryland

11 and Ohio, that we have on under development and

12 construction. And so what that proves is that

13 battery storage now should be seriously looked at in

14 the implementation, or as we try to meet 2011 goals

15 of the Energy Master Plan.

16 There are specific examples that we

17 can give to show how battery storage can help meet

18 those goals. For example, for the first goal which

19 is about saving costs on energy. One of the benefit

20 of battery storage is to provide what's called

21 frequency recalculation. And we all as ratepayers,

22 a portion of our electric bill actually goes to the

23 frequency regulations market. And usually it's a

24 pass through from us to the PJM market. Now, it so


25 happens that with the low cost for utility, if you

34

1 can find a way for utility to actually -- ratepayers

2 ownership of battery storage or the ratepayer

3 procurement of frequency of regulation storage, from

4 battery storage, then New Jersey owners have that

5 energy saved on their electric bill.

6 Now, it also happens that battery

7 storage is a versatile asset. Once we make that

8 investment and we can save money on our bills, we

9 can use the same battery storage to improve solar

10 integration on the grid, increase the value of solar

11 and also provide resilience to offer New Jersey

12 ratepayers.

13 So that is the bulk of the benefit

14 that we can give battery storage and go toward the

15 Energy Master Plan.


17 comments.

18 The next several people on the list

19 would be Ron Hutchinson, it doesn't look like there

20 is any affiliation, Richard Jackson and Jeff Tittle

21 from the Sierra Club.

22 Mr. Hutchinson, if you have an

23 affiliation or represent someone, indicate that.

24 MR. HUTCHINSON: Sure. My name is


25 Ron Hutchinson. I'm a resident of Northfield, New

35

1 Jersey. I also represent South Jersey 350.org.

2 I have three specific

3 recommendations. One, is to look at the New York

4 State Energy Master Plan and what it provides;

5 because it provides really interesting and exciting

6 things that New Jersey's doesn't provide. It

7 provides things like community solar, micro-grid for

8 reliability, energy storage, strong renewable goals,

9 and support for net zero energy homes. And it is in

10 fact a very good way forward that involves both

11 universities, state governments in planning a

12 wonderful document for the future.

13 And if anyone is looking at the

14 growth in solar in New York State can see that it

15 has extreme value. As a New Jersey citizen, I'm

16 embarrassed because our Master Plan not only doesn't

17 put some of those things to the floor; but in

18 practice seems to focus on, as other members have

19 said, on fossil fuels. Which is not the future that

20 I as a New Jersey citizen want to focus on.

21 Number two, ratepayers want wind

22 power and renewables. I pay more for energy that

23 comes from renewables. I capped off the gas

24 pipeline that went into my home. My small little


25 gas pipeline, because it was -- it made more sense

36

1 to do solar, and geothermal and efficiency, than it

2 did to rely on natural gas. So now we power our

3 home with the sun and we power our cars with the

4 sun. It is a fairly easy economic decision to make.

5 And I urge you to look at things like

6 solar battery storage, to look at things like time

7 infused charging for electrical vehicles. Those

8 kind of things can make the difference, and can be

9 actually quite beneficial to the grid, because it

10 allows people to contribute, allows individuals to

11 contribute to a clean energy future.

12 And number three, one of the things

13 that I wish that you guys would do more of is to

14 take into account the social cost of carbon. There

15 is federal guidelines that take this into account.

16 And what this is essentially a way to put a price on

17 carbon, and so the government has done that. And

18 when you start applying these things to things like

19 gas pipelines that are built, and you start,

20 basically, taking into account what the future

21 generations are going to have to deal with, with

22 this increase in CO2 -- which I'm sure we'll hear

23 lots about in the following testimonies -- when we

24 do this that, we take into account that social cost,


25 what it does is, is it means that we don't have a

37

1 fossil fuel future, because those costs as we burn

2 more CO2 become higher and higher and becomes better

3 to go towards renewables. Again it makes a lot of

4 sense to invest in a Master Plan that is

5 forward-looking, than -- invest in things that are

6 that are low-CO2, renewable, CO2-free with solar,

7 things like that, than it does to sink money into

8 projects that are basically wasted, stranded assets

9 that are buried under the ground.

10 So in short, I think we need to spend

11 more of our New Jersey money and capital on things

12 that the people actually want, which are renewables.

13 Thank you.


15 comments.

16 Next is Richard Jackson from the New

17 Jersey Energy Coalition. Mr. Jackson.

18 MR. JACKSON: Good afternoon. And

19 thank you for the opportunity to allow me to speak.

20 I do acknowledge the fellow commissioners and

21 members of staff. It's nice to be with you.

22 My name is Rich Jackson. I am the

23 executive director of the New Jersey Energy

24 Coalition and on behalf of Coalition's 55 member


25 companies and organizations, which happen to include

38

1 virtually all of New Jersey's major electric and gas

2 utilities. I would like to thank you for the

3 opportunity to appear before you today to offer a

4 few brief comments with regards to the coalitions'

5 recommendations regarding the BPU's update of the

6 2011 Energy Master Plan.

7 A little bit about the Coalition; it

8 includes both statewide and local organizations,

9 representing a broad cross-section of energy,

10 utility, labor, environmental, trade, academic,

11 civic constituencies. And our mission, is to

12 promote the production and delivery of clean,

13 reliable and affordable American energy to meet New

14 Jersey's growing and dynamic energy needs,

15 correlates perfectly with the Energy Master Plan's

16 original five overarching goals, which the coalition

17 wholeheartedly continues to endorse and support.

18 As you noted in a couple of your

19 preliminary comments, the state has made

20 considerable progress towards achieving goals, and

21 policy recommendations set forth in late 2011, when

22 the EMP was last updated. The state's energy costs

23 have come down overall. And at the same time,

24 considerable progress has been made in improving


25 energy efficiency, demand response and renewable

39

1 energy initiatives. And the State has greatly

2 improved its position from being one of the highest

3 energy cost states to one that is now much closer to

4 the national average.

5 I must say that the BPU deserves a

6 great deal of credit for these improvements, due

7 largely to the fact that the Commission has

8 authorized over 1 billion dollars in investment in

9 electric and natural gas infrastructure projects,

10 which today are driving improved efficiencies,

11 better safety and lower energy costs.

12 And in addition to these advances

13 since 2011, there have also been great strides made

14 by the State's energy providers to make sure that

15 our energy supply mix is clean, diverse, more

16 reliable than ever before. And in fact today the

17 State ranks as you noted earlier, 46 in emissions

18 out put, yet is the 22nd largest generator of

19 electricity in the country. We also continue to

20 meet our renewable portfolio target as nearly 15

21 percent of the electricity supplied in the state

22 comes from renewable sources, with solar accounting

23 for nearly 3 percent of the State's energy mix.

24 That all said, recent experiences in


25 New Jersey which were mostly weather-related events

40

1 have shown us here today that more and in some cases

2 different emphasizes need to be incorporated into

3 the EMP for implementation by the BPU, as the

4 commission endorses its regulatory mandate of

5 assuring safe, reliable and affordable energy

6 service for the state's residents. So I would like

7 to go through a couple of the recommendations that

8 we, that the Energy Coalition is promoting.

9 First, would be increased investment

10 in electric and natural gas transmission, and

11 distribution infrastructure. That improves system

12 resiliency, as well as emergency response times.

13 Secondly, additional and/or new

14 regulatory initiatives which promote steady,

15 predictable, and sustained infrastructure

16 investment. Wall Street likes predictability.

17 Third, prolongation of regulatory

18 initiatives which drive and encourage end-user

19 energy efficiency.

20 Fourth, a regulatory environment that

21 promotes an open, competitive market-driven power

22 market, which provides a diverse and balanced mix of

23 clean nuclear, natural gas, solar, wind and some

24 degree of coal generation out of necessity.


25 Next, nuclear power should be

41

1 specifically called out and supported as a clean

2 energy source as other emissions-free resources are.

3 And solar must be reaffirmed and expanded. And we

4 view particularly at limited use locations such as

5 landfills and brown field sites.

6 Lastly, increased implementation and

7 utilization of new-proven technologies must be

8 aggressively pushed. Specifically, alternatively

9 fueled vehicles, smart meters, fuel cells, combined

10 heat and power units and the like, are all great

11 examples of assets that are to be deployed in

12 measured intelligent ways to improve efficiency and

13 drive down costs for New Jersey's residents and

14 consumers.

15 I would like to make a note that the

16 energy coalition will be submitting more detailed

17 written comments in support of these recommendations

18 on August 24th.

19 So in closing, the energy coalition

20 wishes to again thank the BPU for its strong

21 leadership role to date, as well for the opportunity

22 to offer our thoughts and recommendations for

23 improving the Energy Master Plan. The coalition and

24 its members are all very key stakeholders in the


25 critical mission of improving energy delivery

42

1 throughout the State of New Jersey. And we

2 certainly welcome the opportunity to assist the BPU

3 in making the EMP as good as, and as effective as it

4 can be.

5 Thank you.


7 comments.

8 The next speaker Jeff Tittle from the

9 Sierra Club.

10 MR. TITTLE: Thank you. I'm here

11 representing our 20,000 members and 60,000

12 supporters, but also our 2 and a half million

13 members and supporters nationally. Because what

14 happens here in New Jersey is critically important

15 for the future, not only of our state, but

16 nationally.

17 New Jersey had been one of the

18 leading states, when it came to clean energy. We

19 are also a state that I think when you ay what's the

20 difference between the 2011 Energy Master Plan

21 today, the biggest change has been, we were one of

22 states that were devastated by climate impacts. You

23 know, tens of billions of dollars worth of damage.

24 When we talk about reliability and making us more


25 resilient, you cannot make our state more resilient,

43

1 without reducing significantly, greenhouse gases.

2 You cannot build your dykes or your sea walls high

3 enough, you cannot elevate homes high enough. And

4 you will just have power plants and power lines

5 bobbing in the ocean. And that is why this plan is

6 so critical.

7 What we see is the major shift from

8 the 2008 plan to the 2011 plan. Is basically

9 higher. More natural gas, less renewable energy,

10 less energy efficiency. We here know what the

11 stakes are, whether we promote green jobs and clean

12 energy future, or are tied to the fossil volitions

13 of the past.

14 One of the reasons I am here today is

15 because we are at ground zero, when it comes our

16 energy future. Right here. Because where we are

17 standing, not only are we in an area that has been

18 -- close to areas that have been devastated by storm

19 after storm, and climate impacts. And we see fish

20 living in storm drains during normal tides, along

21 LBI, but we are also here in the middle of this

22 battle, what is going happen in the future.

23 Right now the stakes are very clear.

24 You have an aging power plant called B.L. England,


25 that you closed, because the coal plant with one

44

1 unit. Instead of having that plant close and

2 replace it with projects like Fishermen's, you want

3 to run a pipeline 22 miles through the middle of the

4 forest preservation area of the Pinelands. We want

5 to repower this plant, that is not necessary,

6 because even PJM itself says we can actually meet

7 the needs of the region without that plant. But yet

8 we are going to have the ratepayers pay billions of

9 dollars to build a private pipeline -- because we,

10 even though we call it a public pipeline, but it's

11 for a private user. And we are going to hide behind

12 reliability. And I guess if that definition, if you

13 lie once, you know, you may get away with it, when

14 you lie a second time it's called reliability. That

15 pipeline is not necessary. That plant is not

16 necessary. And we can easily meet our needs.

17 I wanted talk about where we should

18 be going, because that is just as important. We

19 were second in the nation in monthly installment for

20 solar. We used to be able to sustain at least 40

21 megawatts a month. We are now doing about 12. We

22 were going to be national leader in offshore wind,

23 and we see Rhode Island beating us to it. Right now

24 we see solar going in in Arizona and other places at


25 a utility scale, which we are not doing, at prices

45

1 cheaper than natural gas, without any air pollution.

2 We see wind in the Midwest and Texas going in at

3 half the price of natural gas. So we can save a lot

4 of money for ratepayers, while moving towards a

5 green economy and creating a lot of jobs.

6 We had 10,000 jobs in the solar

7 sector in '09. Now, we have only have 5500. So the

8 point is that we can move the state forward and

9 people in this state demand action on climate

10 change. 400,000 people went to New York to demand

11 action on climate change. The president heard us.

12 Our governor did not.

13 The Pope is going to be in

14 Philadelphia. You know what, if you listen to what

15 the Pope says, there's no penance for failure to do

16 action on climate change. I think that what this is

17 about. It's about the future of our State both

18 economically and environmentally.

19 And that's why we say we should be

20 pushing this State back on the road to a clean

21 energy future, with minimal 30 percent renewable by

22 2020, 20 percent efficiency by 2020, 80 percent

23 renewable by 2050. And that's also critical,

24 because our nuclear power plants age, what are we


25 going to replace them with? More natural gas or are

46

1 we going to replace them with renewables? We can be

2 more aggressive in a program, because we are not

3 even looking at technologies that are emerging,

4 whether it's wave or geothermal, battery storage,

5 and the list goes on and on. We have the

6 technology. What we need is the political will.

7 And the Board of Public Utilities' recommendations

8 are critical; because this State is going to

9 survive, we have to deal with and tackle climate

10 change. Whether it's going back into RGGI, whether

11 it's making sure that the legislature and the

12 governor don't steal over a billion dollars in clean

13 energy money.

14 We need to move the State forward.

15 And the people in the State demand it. It's your

16 job to get it done. So I want to say the State of

17 New Jersey is at its tipping point. We are going to

18 move the state forward, or we are going to continue

19 to see declines in economy and we are going to

20 continue to see devastation by climate change.

21 If you think about the 30 billion

22 dollars Sandy cost the State and the loss of

23 productivity; the investment in renewable energy and

24 energy efficiency, will easily make up for the


25 potential damage from future storms.

47

1 Thank you.

2 PRESIDENT MROZ: Thank you, Mr.

3 Tittle.

4 The next several speakers are in

5 order Doug O' Malley from Environment New Jersey

6 Andrea Bonette, and Sal Risalvato from the New

7 Jersey Gasoline Automotive Association.

8 Mr. O'Malley.

9 MR. O'MALLEY: Good afternoon,

10 President Mroz, and thank you for holding a hearing

11 in South Jersey. And also thank you, Commissioner

12 Fiordaliso, as well as Commissioner Holden.

13 I will work not to be repetitive in

14 my comments, I want to start off, however, by

15 referencing the past involvement during the 2011 EMP

16 hearings from the public, and also the timing of

17 those hearings; they were in June. Obviously these

18 hearings are in August. It's harder for the public

19 to get here in August.

20 That being said, I want to reiterate

21 comments of Rate Counsel to insure the public is

22 allowed to comment on final EMP that is being

23 revised. Part of the reason and I am exited that we

24 are here in South Jersey is because we have talked a


25 lot at the last two hearings of about the

48

1 vulnerability of New Jersey and the importance of

2 resiliency. And no where more a that paramount than

3 here South Jersey. I think it's critical to know,

4 even though South Jersey, and the whole state got

5 hit by both Hurricaine Irene and Sandy, that we in

6 some way dodged a bullet. I say that, you know, not

7 to minimize the damage that those storms occurred,

8 you know, you here in South Jersey and across the

9 region: But to reference the fact that the rainfall

10 we saw in Irene -- and obviously Irene could have

11 hit the Jersey Shore a lot harder than it did, as it

12 hit the City of Paterson and some of our inland

13 counties. And obviously Hurricaine Sandy was

14 devastating, but one of the reasons it was not worse

15 is because we didn't have the rain fall that you

16 expected to see in a traditional superstorm or

17 hurricane.

18 When we are looking at the sea level

19 projections that I have previously referenced from

20 Rutgers, it's important to know that the sea level

21 projections do not include storm level surges. That

22 needs to be part of the BPU's analysis. Not just

23 the sea level rise, but also the storm -- the storm

24 surge.


25 And this is critical to note that

49

1 this is not just a BPU issue, and obviously not just

2 an issue for state government. It's also an issue

3 for the insurance industry. And I encourage the BPU

4 as a part of this review of the EMP to reference the

5 work going back to 2007, by Governor Corzine to

6 bring together the insurance industry to look at the

7 economic impact of sea level rise.

8 We're essentially sitting on top of a

9 ticking time bomb. And that's the liquidity and the

10 future ability of the federal flood insurance

11 program to exist in its current status. As well as

12 the impact on our community by relying solely on the

13 private insurance market. Already from Hurricane

14 Sandy, we've seen communities and residents being

15 priced out of coming back to the shore.

16 In future storms we expect to hit,

17 the coastal regions of state, we can only expect

18 that that will be one of the vice grips in whether

19 we can afford to rebuild, and whether homeowners can

20 afford to rebuild and whether they can afford to be

21 insured from future storms. If it's important to

22 the various regions of the State government, talk to

23 each other. Because just last month DEP finalized

24 coastal development regulations that essentially


25 create massive growth centers in communities like

50

1 Eagleswood and Tuckerton as well Mystic Island.

2 And I strongly encourage as part of

3 the revision of the EMP that the Board of Public

4 Utilities look at these studies on sea level rise

5 and storm surges put together by New Jersey Future

6 for Mystic Island because that community, and it is

7 a community; that community essentially has become

8 an Atlantis according to the projections by the end

9 of 2050. Those are projections that need to be

10 incorporated in the Energy Master Plan.

11 The Energy Master Plan also needs to

12 reflect that we are here in South Jersey but we are

13 very close to the Delaware Bayshore. A region of

14 the state that is essentially below sea level rise.

15 And again on the coastal development regulations,

16 there are communities that are considered to be

17 growth areas. It's critical again, we are

18 acknowledging that we are going to see sea level

19 rise.

20 We have already seen that in the

21 Delaware Bayshore area. Residents know that. They

22 got hit during Sandy. This Energy Master Plan needs

23 to reflect that.

24 Then finally -- of course one of the


25 reasons why its -- well maybe not finally, but one

51

1 of the reasons it's exiting to be here at Stockton,

2 because Stockton, going back six years ago moved

3 forward on solar units on its parking lots. We have

4 heard a lot of the importance of having solar on

5 landfills and brown fields. New Jersey is the Saudi

6 Arabia of many things, but it is certainly the Saudi

7 Arabia of parking lots. And we should be following

8 the leadership we have seen from private and public

9 institutions in the State: William Paterson

10 University using RGGI funds to install, not only

11 install rooftop solar but install solar over its

12 parking lots. Rutgers University is on of the

13 largest installations on the East Coast, on the

14 Livingston Campus. Then, of course, here in

15 Stockton. Obviously, we encourage our good friends

16 of Great Adventure to be incorporating solar above

17 their parking lots.

18 And of course the final reason why

19 it's important we are here, as we have heard many

20 speakers, is the EMP and its fate. But I want to

21 reference the other critical reason that we are here

22 in South Jersey and that is promise and potential of

23 offshore wind. I was heartened by the announcement

24 of news last Thursday on the actions of the BPU to


25 commission an independent consultant to help the BPU

52

1 with it's OREC rules and offshore wind rules.

2 In the words of Senator Bob Smith,

3 why isn't BPU doing this job? And quite frankly,

4 you know this announcement is five years too late,

5 and I hope it's not too little. And when we are

6 looking at the Energy Master Plan, and its revision,

7 there is a clear timeline for this OREC rules to

8 come out. And it's a revision, obviously, it needs

9 to reference this independent consultant. But also

10 reference the time line on when these rules will

11 come out, because it's going to be five years on

12 Wednesday. It's five year too long.

13 And we are obviously starting to miss

14 out on some economic benefits of offshore wind that

15 are referenced again in the Energy Master Plan,

16 specifically the potential for Paulsboro to be an

17 economic engine for offshore wind. That should stay

18 in the Energy Master Plan, but it needs to be tied

19 with a timeline for offshore wind to be become a

20 reality. We have already seen neighboring states

21 start to benefit from offshore wind. And this

22 summer, there were barges literary attack the Jersey

23 Shore, bringing turbines up to Rhode Island

24 beginning construction of the Block Island facility


25 up there.

53

1 The question is when -- how long must

2 we wait. I wanted to thank the testimony of Paul

3 Gallagher from Fishermen's Energy. That project

4 should be a win-win for the State. And Paul

5 referenced the fact that Fishermen's has its

6 permits. And most importantly won a national

7 contest to get a DOE grant of more than 50 million

8 dollars. And is more ahead of the other winning

9 applications. It is really an incredulous situation

10 that Fishermen's is now appealing to the State

11 Supreme Court to essentially offer its services as a

12 pilot project. Again Fishermen's got signoff for

13 ratepayer counsel. And would be a clear way to move

14 forward on offshore wind. And I encourage the BPU

15 to include -- rethink its previous opposition on

16 Fishermen's.

17 Finally I want to reference really

18 what's the topic of the day and the thing that is

19 the most different from the hearing on Tuesday and

20 Thursday: Is just the incredible actions we saw on

21 the Pinelands Commission on Friday morning. And its

22 impact for B.L. England and South Jersey Gas in it's

23 proposed pipeline -- the and proposed pipeline

24 through the Pinelands. And I think it's critical to


25 note that the Energy Master Plan is, it's a

54

1 governing document. It does not, obviously, hold

2 the force of law. And when we are looking at the

3 Energy Master Plan, it has open questions on whether

4 the goal of the Energy Master Plan to further the

5 gas infrastructure in the state should overrule the

6 comprehensive management plans of the Pinelands

7 Commission that has held for 35 years. And we

8 really saw an incredible round out of the Pinelands

9 Commission on Friday morning. We saw more than you

10 know literally tens of thousands of comments as well

11 as the 15 commissioners, themselves and their

12 ability to review this project, be eliminated.

13 Obviously, the BPU still holds a

14 role. But I want to ask the Board of Public

15 Utilities whether they would allow their own staff

16 to overrule the decision making power of the

17 Commissioners. When the BPU -- when this process

18 does come to the Board, it's critical, some of these

19 arguments already have already been brought forward

20 in the July hearing. They were thought obviously

21 talked about in the July 22nd Board Meeting in

22 Trenton. It's critical that the Board look at the

23 PJM analysis for the need for more power.

24 We're seeing a game of Three Card


25 Monte from South Jersey Gas. They're saying the

55

1 importance of having this pipeline and B.L. England

2 is to primarily serve the Pinelands and at the same

3 time to increase reliability in the South Jersey

4 region. And the ing the question is: Which one is

5 it? Because it's the same application that was

6 rejected by the Pinelands Commission. The facts are

7 still the same. And the for the BPU is whether they

8 are going to really rubber stamp this previous

9 decision?

10 I want to stop here, because I know I

11 have gone over my time. And I want to obviously

12 thank the Board for considering all these public

13 comments. And once again to insure that the pubic

14 gets a chance to weigh in beyond the August 24th

15 deadline.


17 comments.

18 The next speaker is Andrea Bonette.

19 And Ms. Bonette, if you have a group that you

20 represent or an affiliation.

21 MS. BONETTE: No I am just speaking

22 for myself. I would like that thank you for

23 pronouncing my name correctly.

24 I am certainly not an expert on


25 anything. I have lived in the state and I'm a

56

1 fourth generation Californian, but I have lived in

2 this state for almost half a century. And I have

3 come to love it, from the mountains to Long Beach

4 Island. And another reason that I love it is

5 because I have five grandchildren and a great

6 grandson, all of whom live in New Jersey.

7 So I would like to ask you to look

8 long-term, look at the big picture. I'm not an

9 expert. I am not going to give you details. But I

10 know about the big picture. I have taught over a

11 thousand children. They trust us to keep the state

12 a healthy and safe place. And I certainly, my

13 grandchildren certainly do.

14 The basic premises, if you make a

15 pledge of allegiance, which I certainly have made

16 thousands of times with my own elementary school

17 children; but if you think of yourselves as taking

18 another kind of pledge, even if you don't say it

19 formally, look at the big picture, recognize and

20 with deal climate change. That is terribly

21 important. And think of the meaning of the prefix

22 non in nonrenewable energy. It's not going to last

23 forever.

24 Think if everybody talks about the


25 costs of lowering, cost of energy to consumers, but

57

1 how about the cost that is way too much ignored and

2 very real. The cost of our forest, air, streams,

3 farms, the Delaware River of continuing as we are.

4 Think of Governor Christie's administration, which

5 I'm not going to comment on, I would get too upset,

6 but hopefully he will not be with us forever; and we

7 will begin to care about the environment a little

8 more than some people in the administration do.

9 Also think of the dubious claims that

10 I have seen, I have been involved in these pipeline

11 issues for quite sometime. The dubious claims made

12 by the gas industry, which they make with a straight

13 face: Just as a tiny example, when they talk about

14 the terrible reliability problem they had during the

15 terrible winter of 2013/2014. But what they failed

16 to disclose is the problems were almost 98 percent

17 fixed in that also terrible winter of 2014/2015.

18 So I'm hoping as everybody said

19 today, that your target goals will be for renewable

20 energy solar and wind power, and perhaps nuclear, if

21 it's managed properly, energy efficiency as

22 everybody has mentioned. But also a very important

23 goal would be keeping New Jersey's air and water and

24 land healthy and beautiful in the process. Thank


25 you.

58


2 comments.

3 Next is Sal Risalvato from New Jersey

4 Gasoline Store and Automotive Association. Good

5 afternoon.

6 MR. RISALVATO: Thank you very much,

7 President Mroz and the other commissioners. I think

8 my staff forwarded my testimony. But I do have a

9 copy with me, if I should leave it off with member.

10 PRESIDENT MROZ: If it's been

11 forwarded to our offices, we would have it and it's

12 part of the record. And you can do any follow-up to

13 make sure it's filed.

14 MR. RISALVATO: I'm here to talk

15 about several things. One is energy and resiliency.

16 We paid attention, that this is going to be part of

17 what your hearings on the Energy Master Plan are

18 going to look into, and because of our experiences

19 after Hurricane Sandy, it's very important for us to

20 take every opportunity with every state agency,

21 legislator and even the governor's office and office

22 of recovery and rebuilding. We have literally

23 spoken to everybody we could, emergency management,

24 State Police, to talk about our experiences and help


25 shape future public policy with regard to energy

59

1 resilience. It is important to note that the

2 mainstay of what we are trying to educate people on

3 regards backup generation at gas stations.

4 It's an emotional kind of an issue.

5 There is a lot of people that think, it's an easy.

6 Fix and as a result, right after Hurricane Sandy

7 there were about a dozen different legislators that

8 introduced various forms of generator legislation,

9 most of it mandating that gas station owners install

10 generators.

11 Of course, I don't think that really

12 understood the full impact because they were

13 probably all thinking you can just run down the

14 street to Home Depot, buy a five or six hundred

15 dollar generator, slap it into your gas station and

16 plug your gas pumps in and it is just not that

17 simple.

18 In fact several of my members, trying

19 to be good citizens and help out local ambulance

20 squads and police departments did, in fact, do that

21 and wound up with thousands of dollars worth of

22 damage to their pumps and the electronics that

23 control them. So that was one issue that we needed

24 to educate people on.


25 The actual cost of generators in gas

60

1 stations needed to do the trick in a real minimal

2 situation is about the minimum that we came up with

3 is about $11,000. But that is really an exception

4 even to the rule. Most of the gas stations would

5 require 50,000 plus dollars. And we have some right

6 now that actually are having them installed at cost

7 of greater than $120,000.

8 A lot of what we did speak to

9 legislators and other state agencies on did not fall

10 on deaf ears. And thankfully it is, the EDA did

11 come up with a program that came up with grants as

12 high as $65,000 in certain circumstances. And we

13 have some members that are taking advantage of that.

14 However, the actual cost their project is over

15 $120,000. So it does help.

16 They would never do it otherwise,

17 even if the cost were say $25,000. It would take

18 about 20 Superstorm Sandys for them to ever recoup

19 their money. They just wouldn't do it.

20 But here is most important thing that

21 we have needed educate public agencies about. If

22 every single gas station in the state of New Jersey

23 had already had a back up generator when Superstorm

24 Sandy hit. You would have seen the exact same gas


25 lines. We did not have a power problem. We had,

61

1 and we did not have a gasoline shortage either. We

2 had a delivery problem of getting gasoline to gas

3 stations, because they could not fill the delivery

4 trucks. And that is the root of the problem.

5 PSE&G did an enormous job of focusing

6 on gas stations. I worked with PSE&G form the

7 minute the storm ended, the Governor's Office, the

8 State Police, Office of Emergency Management, FEMA

9 and the Department of Defense, lots of different

10 agencies to identify gas stations that had gas in

11 the ground, but did not have electricity. And we

12 started at almost hourly forwarding a list of

13 locations that we came up with the from the minute

14 the storm ended. In a few days that list was

15 changed from gas stations with gas and no power to

16 gas stations with no pow -- with power and no gas.

17 Because the second their power was restored, they

18 ran out of gas. And this was also a function of

19 people filling up those little gas cans, because

20 home generators had become so popular.

21 So it's important for this body to

22 understand that -- that would never have worked,

23 mandatory generators won't work. We do look for

24 more incentives to have to encourage our members to


25 install generators.

62

1 The other thing that we would like to

2 pledge our support on and also look for some

3 incentive is the idea of alternate fuels. We are

4 strongly behind -- even though we sell gasoline and

5 diesel; I'm always preaching to my members, that

6 even though you may not realize it right now,

7 because we are sitting in a glut situation, but some

8 day there will be a last drop of oil and natural

9 gas. They are just finite supplies. And if we

10 don't start transitioning over to things like

11 hydrogen and wind and solar. And even natural gas

12 right now is a bridge. These are things that are

13 good from a carbon point of view, as well as an

14 energy security point of view.

15 So we would love to work with this

16 agency, and any other agency to help put together

17 anything that creates incentives. Because we have a

18 chicken and egg situation. I would like to be

19 dating service to hook my members up with alternate

20 forms of energy, and the customers that will buy it.

21 They won't make these investments without having

22 customers. And customers aren't going to purchase

23 the vehicle that operate on alternate fuels, if they

24 don't have any place to buy them. So I would love


25 to work with the BPU and help in that regard.

63

1 One more item, then I will close, and

2 this is personal item: Because of my involvement in

3 energy over the years, I have become a huge fan of

4 wind and solar. And I preach it to my members

5 constantly and I'm trying to get my members to use

6 their canopies to install solar, and put solar into

7 their gas stations. I made that investment a year

8 ago on my home. And I love it, and I can't see why

9 anybody wouldn't want to do it.

10 However, there is one frustrating

11 point that I have. And I think it really needs to

12 be considered. I was willing to install more solar

13 panels on my roof than I was permitted. And that is

14 very frustrating. And, especially, since at the

15 time I was installing it, I had already just

16 completed the installation of an in ground pool with

17 a filter that was going to be running ten hours a

18 day and was going to use an enormous amount of

19 electricity that was not included in my electric use

20 from the previous 12 months and calculated from my

21 solar use. I was not permitted to submit that. I

22 think there are some small adjustments that need to

23 be made, because obviously the more solar power we

24 generate, the better off we all are. I don't see


25 how that was such a big deal.

64

1 So I would like to go on the record

2 with that, and have some people consider that.

3 Because if I could have doubled my solar output,

4 certainly society as whole benefits, the State

5 benefits and it should have been permitted.

6 Thank you very much.


8 comments.

9 We will take the next three speakers

10 Klaus Rittenbach, George Hay and Bruce Burcat.

11 Klaus Rittenbach from Climate Impact

12 New Jersey. Good afternoon.

13 MR. RITTENBACH: Good afternoon, hi.

14 My name is Klaus Rittenbach. I'm a member of two

15 groups Climate Action, New Jersey, with about 500

16 members and citizens, Climate Lobby with 11,000.

17 At Thursday's hearing I talked about

18 how building and retrofilling our houses and

19 commercial buildings to a group of standards called

20 the German Passive House Standards could meet your

21 overarching goal of driving down the cost of energy,

22 and your goal of rewarding energy efficiency and

23 energy conservation. Houses built to the German

24 Passive House Standard are incredibly energy


25 efficient, better than lead platinum saving 80 to 90

65

1 percent of the energy needed in a conventional house

2 or building.

3 Today I want to focus on your number

4 one over arching goal again, which is to drive down

5 the cost of energy. Costs are important and when we

6 talk about costs of various forms of energy, we need

7 to make sure that we include the total costs in our

8 calculations. There are the market costs, but there

9 are also very significant external costs of various

10 types of energy which economists call externality

11 and Ron Hutchinson son called them the social cost.

12 It's all the same thing.

13 Both conservatives and liberal

14 economists agree that we need to take these

15 externalities into account. And they are not

16 properly taken into account in the current Master

17 Plan. Here is my personal example of one of the

18 many negative externalities of burning fossil fuels:

19 I have asthma, my son has asthma, we pay a lot of

20 money for my asthma medications. Every time coal is

21 burned, that makes the air quality worse, and

22 increases our healthcare costs, not just for me but

23 all the people in New Jersey, who suffer from

24 respiratory diseases. It also increases the


25 insurance premiums for everyone in New Jersey. That

66

1 is just one example of the many externalities.

2 We need to include estimates of the

3 negative externalities in the Energy Master Plan,

4 and those externalities need to be fully when making

5 a decision about which form of energy New Jersey

6 will support and a promote.

7 Estimates of the externalities of

8 omitting carbon pollution vary depending on what

9 they include in their calculations. The EPA

10 currently uses a price of $40 per metric ton of

11 carbon pollution to inform its policy making.

12 However, many scientists and economists think this

13 number is way too low. That it doesn't reflect the

14 latest research.

15 Recent research from Stamford

16 University, Cambridge, London School of Economics,

17 University of Zurich, and others show that the

18 actual negative externalities of carbon pollution

19 are somewhere between $100 a ton and $220 a ton.

20 When you take those externalities into account, it

21 significantly the affects your assessment of which

22 forms of energy have the lowest levelize cost. In

23 other words, the cost spread over the useful life of

24 the system.


25 When you add in all of the

67

1 externalities, energy and efficiency and

2 conservation measures become much more

3 cost-competitive, because they not only save energy,

4 but they have a positive externality in reducing the

5 amount of carbon pollution. Coal becomes much less

6 cost competitive because of it's high degree of

7 pollution. All this needs to be made clear in the

8 Energy Master Plan.

9 So to sum up I have the following

10 three recommendations: Number 1, when you talk

11 about costs in the Energy Master Plan also include a

12 range of estimates, of external costs or

13 externalities or social costs.

14 Number 2, include a table of various

15 types of energy with the levelized market costs of

16 each, along with the various estimates of the

17 externalities from $40 a ton on the low end to $220

18 a ton on the high end for carbon pollution.

19 And finally, Number 3 make

20 recommendations in the Energy Master Plan about

21 which types of energy and energy conservation to

22 support, based on estimates of total levelized

23 costs, including both externality and market costs.

24 When we talk about driving down the cost of energy


25 for all customers, we need to make sure that we

68

1 include all costs; both the market costs and the

2 externalities. Otherwise, we are just fooling

3 ourselves into thinking we are saving money, when in

4 fact we will end up collectively spending much more,

5 if we don't take into account the externalities.

6 Thank you.


8 comments. Next is George Hay.

9 Mr. Hay if you have an affiliation or

10 represent some interest, please tell us.

11 MR. HAY: George Hay. I'm a South

12 Jersey Gas and Atlantic City Electric ratepayer

13 member of the AARP and I plan to be joining the

14 Sierra Club, and some others, I support their agenda

15 as well in the renewable community.

16 Some background, I'm a semi-retired

17 Somers Point resident. I was in Ocean City during

18 Sandy, when it occurred and stayed on the island,

19 probably stupidly. And I have been studying Ocean

20 City and the economics. And but my real background

21 is in electric resource planning for utility

22 research analysis and managing a research consortium

23 on gas turbines. And the one near Millville is as a

24 result of one I was involved in the 1990s, the


25 Alpine am megawatt air cooled gas turbine.

69

1 As a South Jersey Gas ratepayer

2 experiencing Hurricane Sandy, I'm paying very high

3 flood insurance rates from FEMA, currently. Really

4 buying in Somers Point I didn't think I would have

5 it, but they are already reflecting Sea level rise

6 and projections. I see every day houses being

7 raised in Ocean City. And as well as the B.L.

8 England plant, every time I go across the bridge it

9 was quite party conversation, to sponsor a boat next

10 year to have tons of people in Ocean City,

11 overlooking this beautiful scenery and there is this

12 power plan off in the distance, that doesn't need to

13 be there.

14 I oppose the South Jersey Gas

15 pipeline through the Pinelands, given all the

16 environmental damage it would cause. I don't

17 believe it is needed. The numbers I have read, it's

18 95 percent gas going to the power plant. The

19 purpose of electric deregulation was to remove the

20 risk to the ratepayers of wholesale electric market

21 projects and essentially the gas customers will be

22 bearing the risk of the South Jersey Gas investment

23 in that pipeline. And that wasn't the intent of

24 electric deregulation.


25 I think it carries the route to the

70

1 gas side of the house, the power plants or South

2 Jersey industry should be paying for that trailer

3 pipeline. I don't want my bill to go up to pay for

4 that pipeline.

5 I do support the going back to the

6 2008 RPS goals of 30 percent renewable and clean

7 energy program funding. Particularly, I support the

8 idea of 100 percent 2050 renewable, energy

9 efficiency distributed resource goal to be set, and

10 research programs to figure out how to best achieve

11 it to the least cost of ratepayers and the highest

12 values.

13 I have reviewed the energy plan. I

14 probably have about 15 pages written up. I have

15 been trying to condense them down by each of the

16 subgoals, but I will try to go through them quickly.

17 I am glad there is an Energy Master Plan. It's a

18 good thing. The State's, the cost of mistakes are

19 high on these plans. I lived through California and

20 a 26 billion dollar settlement of stranded assets of

21 bad plans in the 1970s and 80s and then in the in

22 1990s with deregulation deals. They didn't listen

23 to some of our advice on replacing California's

24 20,000 megawatts of old steam units, similar to New


25 Jersey. And the net result was PGEE and Enron and

71

1 the players of the market went bankrupt. And there

2 probably was a hundred billion to two hundred

3 billion economic ratepayer impact, tax payer impact

4 of not planning well.

5 My point is on the planning, there is

6 good and bad in the California market. I'm really a

7 utility guy. But I have been trained to try to look

8 at both the ratepayers and the stockholders,

9 relative to trade offs. In the end, I really

10 believe the plan as it is now is seriously flawed,

11 given the technical, economic and market assumptions

12 it's more of an accounting of major sources of

13 wholesale power. And everything else is really hand

14 waving. Electric grids is really a system

15 integration function. It's a machine that has to be

16 designed by technical people, not political

17 committees. And when they break the results are

18 very catastrophic.

19 On the cost of energy goal, the cost

20 of energy really isn't the wholesale price. That's

21 down in the 1 to 3 cent a kilowatt hour rate. My

22 utility bill is around 18 cents. Everything in

23 between is a delivery cost. So spending more on

24 delivery to New Jersey, really increases cost,


25 whether it's gas or electric. And I really don't

72

1 believe that the investments in the electric and gas

2 have anything to do with coastal community

3 reliability, which is a local phenomenon.

4 In the events that just occurred this

5 year with derecho, the trees knocking down local

6 distribution lines. And the only way you can really

7 get at that is generation at the customer site. The

8 closer you get to the customer, the higher the

9 electric reliability. And as a general principal

10 peaking power you want to have very close to the

11 customer because you don't get high asset

12 utilization transmission distribution system.

13 So New Jersey is shifting its steam

14 plant fleet, from essentially peaking base load,

15 potentially base load with things like B.L. England.

16 You're sort of then relying on out of state peaking

17 power coming through the line. If the line goes

18 down there is no backup power in New Jersey.

19 If offshore wind comes in, if B.L.

20 England's built, potentially, the transmission lines

21 could be clogged up, if 3,000 megawatts is intended

22 to come through there, it's going to have to come

23 through the transmission system, if other things are

24 blocking it, it really requires integrated planning.


25 I think there is a bias of electric

73

1 and gas utility to wire and pipe investments because

2 their stock holder benefit from that and they are

3 not allowed to consider peaking generation,

4 distributed generation, renewable generation, that

5 would serve their customers. And I really think the

6 utilities have to play greater role at that level.

7 There has got to be incentive for

8 efficiency for peaking power. I think it was a

9 mistake under deregulation to leave peaking power in

10 the PJM. It really is a very integral function of

11 designing an electric grid. And the closer you have

12 it to the customer, the better. Just thinking about

13 the gas station, I think it would be great;

14 renewable energy secure gas stations. A type of

15 concept of how that can be designed.

16 One thing that does bother me the

17 degree of which Atlantic City's merger with Exelon

18 is going to give them too much market power and

19 political power, being from here to Illinois. And

20 what impact that will have on future rates.

21 That is some of my biggest concerns

22 on some of the flaws in the plan that so much has

23 changed technologically in the market since 2011.

24 It really requires a good update.


25 The diverse portfolio of renewable

74

1 energy is really the intent. We're not picking

2 winners or losers in the plan. I think the plan

3 picks gas and nuclear winners and really the

4 renewable's peaking power of distributed resources

5 have really been neglected in action since 2011.

6 The state of the technology -- well I

7 won't bother you with gas turbine details. I will

8 try to get on with it. I support increase in an

9 energy efficiency program. Usually that is a least

10 cost option. I wish Ocean City had done it in the

11 1990s, inside of the transmission line that comes

12 across 34th Street.

13 Finally the renewables, I support

14 moving to the 30 percent for 2021 goals restoration

15 of the clean energy program funds, including some

16 for research and development of new technologies and

17 the risk of their demonstration. The Fishermen's

18 Energy pilot I think they is really lot of valuable

19 things from a research perspective that will be

20 learned in that pilot that justifies a higher cost,

21 relative to planning out a thousand to 3,000

22 megawatts some day that will reduce the future cost

23 of wind.

24 I really think there is a role of


25 things like sustainable Jersey and utilities and

75

1 communities working together, the counties, the 566

2 municipalities, to do an integrated resource

3 planning and reasonable. We call it renewable

4 energy secured communities or net zero energy. I'm

5 still a little involved in that research in

6 California. A lot of them are looking at that and

7 that's probably the best way to get a reliability

8 microgrid. But the business model doesn't really

9 encourage that.

10 So I appreciate your listening to my

11 remarks, and I will submit written comments.

12 PRESIDENT MROZ: Thank you. We look

13 forward to seeing them.

14 The next speaker is Bruce Burcat from

15 Midatlantic Renewable Energy Coalition.

16 MR. BURCAT: Good afternoon,

17 President Mroz. I'm executive director of

18 Midatlantic Renewable Energy Coalition, which we

19 call MAREC.

20 MAREC is a non-profit organization

21 that's formed to help advance the opportunities for

22 renewable energy development in the region, or where

23 the regional transmission organization PJM

24 interconnection operates. Our footprint also


25 includes New Jersey, which is part of that large

76

1 region.

2 MAREC members have included wind

3 developers, wind turbine manufacturers, service

4 companies, non-profit organizations, transmission

5 companies dedicated to the growth of renewable

6 technologies. MAREC members have developed, owned

7 and operated thousands of megawatts for renewable

8 energy serving PJM territory, and this includes

9 serving customers in New Jersey.

10 One of the main themes in the 2011

11 Energy Master Plan was that New Jersey ratepayers

12 pay too much for electricity, and all resource

13 procurement and development, whether done to meet

14 general electricity needs or meet renewable

15 portfolio standard, should be evaluated based on

16 whether procurement is cost-effective. We too share

17 concerns about utility rates and the cost of energy

18 and understanding the need to drive down costs for

19 all consumers.

20 Nevertheless, we believe that the

21 2011 Energy Master Plan fails to consider the

22 significantly renewable energy resource and regional

23 on shore wind energy, which would provide New Jersey

24 ratepayers a cost-effective opportunity to help meet


25 the mandates of the renewable energy portfolio

77

1 standard.

2 According to the DOE's Lawrence

3 Berkeley National Laboratory, since 2009 onshore

4 wind prices have dropped nearly 67 percent at their

5 low, and at they're at their lowest levels ever.

6 Wind energy from on shore lands based wind farms

7 from a price perspective compare very favorably to

8 other energy resources, like natural gas. And other

9 fossil fuel projects, when comparing new

10 construction of these generating resources.

11 Not only is wind cost-effective, but

12 policies supporting long-term contracts for wind

13 energy help get these projects financed at

14 reasonable rates. And insure price stability. This

15 is because the resource itself is not subject to the

16 price volatility facing traditional fossil fuel

17 resources over the long-term, like coal and natural

18 gas.

19 In addition to the 2011 plan's

20 support of offshore wind, we think that it's

21 important that onshore wind resources be considered

22 as a significant resource in helping New Jersey meet

23 its renewable portfolio standard. The 2011 Master

24 Plan expressed a preference for in- state renewable


25 development. We do not oppose some reasonable

78

1 preferences, however, we think it is important not

2 lose sight of the value lower electricity prices

3 have with respect to economic development for the

4 state. As New Jersey seeks to attract and retain

5 businesses and industries, we believe that New

6 Jersey Energy Master Plan should maintain the

7 eligibility for all low cost options in meeting

8 State's renewable energy standards to prevent unduly

9 expensive electricity prices, which could have and

10 adverse impact on the economic development.

11 Now the 2011 Energy Master Plan

12 reduced the target for the State's renewable energy

13 portfolio standard from 30 percent to 2020 to 22.5

14 percent by 2020. We believe as other commentators

15 have stated that the plan should be updated and

16 reflect a significant increase in that standard.

17 Not only will the citizens of the State gain from

18 increasing the level to zero reading resource. As

19 noted, increased reliance on renewable energy

20 resources, can be achieved cost-effectively by the

21 procurement of wind energy resources for land-based

22 project.

23 Moreover the final rules of the EPA's

24 clean power plan now require to State to plan to


25 further reduce its carbon footprint. One of the

79

1 three building blocks of the final rule is to

2 achieve reductions of carbon through increased

3 emphasis on renewable energy technology.

4 This concludes my remarks. I want to

5 thank you again for the opportunity to speak today

6 on this issue.

7 PRESIDENT MROZ: Thank you very much.

8 I think at this point we have been at

9 this for about an hour and a half. I would like to

10 take a 10 minute break to give us all room to

11 stretch and for the court reporter to stretch her

12 fingers. We will back, my watch says 2:45, so we

13 will reconvene at five minutes to 3:00. And we will

14 finish the preregistration list. Then those

15 speakers that have registered today. Thank you.

16 (Whereupon a brief recess was taken.)

17 PRESIDENT MROZ: Welcome back. We

18 will reconvene. Turning your attention -- thank

19 you. We are reaching the end of the preregistered

20 attendee list. And we only have now it appears one

21 other person from the preregistered list who wishes

22 to speak that is Richard Colby from the Sierra Club.

23 Mr. Colby.

24 MR. COLBY: Thank you. I am the


25 community solar issues coordinator for the New

80

1 Jersey Chapter of the Sierra Club, and one of the

2 volunteer members as opposed to the three staff

3 members. I am speaking, I think, on behalf of 85

4 percent of households in New Jersey that can't have

5 solar panels on roofs either, because as in the case

6 of my house, it's too old for the roof to support

7 such panels. Or because the orientation and design

8 of the roof is inappropriate because the roof is

9 shaded by trees or because, I, myself am too old to

10 expect the reasonable pay back in the few years that

11 I am likely to continue to live. In fact there are

12 many people who can't own their homes or can't

13 afford it, or wouldn't be able to organize it.

14 So the solution for such people to

15 have community solar opportunities, whereby an

16 organization would build solar farms on vacant brown

17 field sites and parking lots and other appropriate

18 places, and offer solar farm electricity on a

19 subscription basis. I made this suggestion at your

20 meeting five years ago. I hope my making it this

21 time will have more side effects, than I had the

22 last time.

23 But there is an emerging technology

24 for such projects that's known as net metering, by


25 which smart meters are able to keep track of amount

81

1 of solar power that's coming from the community

2 farm, and to pay back the electric company the

3 appropriate delivery fee. Which is the objection I

4 got from Vince Maione, the head of Atlantic Electric

5 which I proposed this idea to him a few years ago.

6 Net metering is in the news. It is in general use

7 in Europe and in many states in this country.

8 As example, for three months of each

9 year I am privileged to live with a scientist

10 colleague in Oxford, England, where we have solar

11 panels on the roof and a smart meter in the garage,

12 that keeps track of all the kilowatt hours billable

13 to the electric company. You, the BPU presumably

14 has the expertise to evaluate net metering

15 independently of Atlantic Electric. I suggest you

16 Google smart meters or net metering or community

17 solar, as I have just done, and in the last two

18 years I have discovered the BPUs in a number of

19 states have enabled solar community, solar projects.

20 And you will see projects that are active in

21 California, Colorado, Florida, Massachusetts, Utah,

22 all described in the Wikipedia entry on community

23 solar. So the technology, I suggest to you has

24 emerged.


25 I can supply you, if you would like,

82

1 a map of Atlantic County, prepared by the municipal

2 planning office that shows municipal brown field

3 sites, such as abandoned landfills in relation to

4 nearby high voltage power lines so power can be fed

5 into the grid. My inquires of County Executive

6 Dennis Levinson of Atlantic County have resulted in

7 his offer of the ACUA as an appropriate developer

8 and operator of municipal solar farms in each of the

9 23 municipalities in Atlantic County. My friend

10 Rick Dovey who's the head of ACUA is ready to go and

11 all he would like to have is authorization from the

12 New Jersey BPU, so please permit my suggestion that.

13 This idea is worthy of prime time.

14 Thank you.


16 comments.

17 So that is concludes the speakers who

18 have preregistered. We will now move to the list of

19 those who appeared today and indicated they wanted

20 to speak. The first three people who have done, so

21 and we will take them in this order Jaclyn Rhodes

22 from the Pinelands Alliance, I think it's Margo

23 Pellegrino and Tom Dougherty. And I cannot tell the

24 affiliation, so please if you come up, confirm your


25 representation, or if you have an affiliation and

83

1 your comments.

2 MS. RHODES: I am with the Pinelands

3 Preservation Alliance. My name is Jaclyn Rhodes.

4 I'm the Assistant Executive Director. Thank you for

5 the opportunity to give a statement today. And we

6 appreciate your presence here in South Jersey, as it

7 relates especially to the Pinelands area. My

8 comments mostly will focus on how BPU addresses

9 natural gas in the Energy Master Plan, in light of

10 two proposed pipeline to come through the Pinelands.

11 One being serviced by South Jersey Gas, the other

12 for New Jersey Natural Gas.

13 And three issues, I want to bring up.

14 One the justification for natural gas, two this

15 issue for reliability, and three how planning plays

16 into all of this.

17 First, I would state that in your

18 report you state New Jersey has one of the highest

19 concentrations of natural gas use in the U.S.,

20 further adding that about 30 percent of electricity

21 is generated or being created by the use of natural

22 gas. Yet we are seeing more and more pipelines

23 being proposed for natural gas. These are

24 transmission lines. At least for the two that are


25 proposed for the Pinelands. If our goal is to

84

1 achieve a minimum 22.5 percent for renewables and

2 potentially higher, which we would hope would go

3 higher; we have already kind of met our ceiling in

4 terms of natural gas. Why do we need more

5 pipelines, right?

6 Then you also state that the report

7 that goal for having a diverse portfolio is really

8 to reduce costs for ratepayers. And from our

9 evaluation, just looking at the two proposed natural

10 gas pipelines for the Pinelands. Those pipeline

11 costs are to be shared by the ratepayers. And yet

12 we have yet to see in the Master Plan itself any

13 evaluation or mapping of interstate lines, whether

14 or not any kind of cost/benefit analysis has been

15 done to evaluate the current pipelines, and the

16 benefits that you would receive from the new

17 pipelines. And, obviously, all that is a glaring

18 omission, considering that your role is planning for

19 New Jersey's energy future.

20 The second is this issue of

21 reliability. So the two pipelines that are proposed

22 are dealing with, or supposed to address reliability

23 issues, and get closer to the codes and in light of

24 Hurricane Sandy, as proposed by those two companies,


25 New Jersey Natural Gas and South Jersey Gas, and yet

85

1 the federal government had put a temporary hold and

2 this was issued in the New Jersey Spot Light, our

3 goal on April 2, 2015, that basically it was a plan

4 to address reliability; and one of the criticism of

5 PJM's plan addressing reliability issues, which

6 obviously these pipelines would feed into that

7 planning effort, was that it would lead to price

8 spikes for consumers. Again, how are we first

9 addressing the goals of reducing costs for

10 ratepayers and the reliability; and yet this is

11 going to cause an increase in cost for those

12 individuals?

13 Third, planning. Which I find is

14 significantly lacking considering this is called an

15 Energy Master Plan, when we don't even take a look

16 at interstate pipelines. As I mentioned before, I

17 didn't see an evaluation, a map of that, any kind of

18 indication of what is -- what the future holds for

19 proposed pipelines, what kind of impact that would

20 have on the state. From our perspective at the

21 Pinelands Preservation Alliance, obviously we are

22 concerned about these pipelines. We are opposed to

23 both that come through the Pinelands, because of the

24 improper planning, because it's violating the


25 comprehensive management plan. And obviously above

86

1 all, it truly doesn't address the energy needs for

2 the state.

3 So we have three recommendations.

4 First, being that we go back it focusing again on

5 achieving greater renewables for the state. We

6 already have a high concentration of natural gas.

7 We should include the goal again of 30 percent for

8 renewables and should go higher, rather than 22.5

9 that you mentioned.

10 Second, plan appropriately. Before

11 you make any decisions on our energy future. When

12 we are talking about so many natural gas pipelines,

13 coming through the state, cutting through the state

14 and also crossings over the Delaware River; we

15 should see a thorough evaluation of those interstate

16 pipelines. Mapping of them, what currently exists.

17 Public doesn't know. I mean we are struggling to

18 figure it out and pulling maps together. The one

19 source of information we should be able to go to is

20 the BPU for that information. And we have not been

21 able to obtain that information. And we should have

22 that all that available at hand.

23 What are benefit/cost analysis and

24 I'm not just talking about dollars and cents from


25 putting in a pipeline to how many job are created to

87

1 the rates that ratepayers would have to pay; but

2 also natural resource impacts, the climate change

3 impacts. All of those things need to be taken into

4 consideration, truly doing a true analysis of those

5 costs as well benefits.

6 And lastly, BPU had submitted an

7 application to the Pineland's Commission, or I

8 should say a waiver in the form of Memorandum of

9 Agreement on behalf of South Jersey Gas. We see

10 that as a direct conflict of interest. You are

11 developing an Energy Master Plan for the State; you

12 are supposed to be evaluating natural gas, all

13 sources of energy use; yet being at the forefront

14 advocating for one individual's pipeline is a

15 significant conflict. We have had commissioners on

16 the Pinelands Commission, that have had to recuse

17 themselves on this very same matter, only because

18 their university and law clinic had submitted a

19 letter asking for more time on a particular hearing

20 for comments. Yet, we have the same Board of

21 Commissioners for BPU, having to make a decision on

22 South Jersey Gas, when they were first representing

23 South Jersey Gas. In light of that everybody should

24 recuse themselves and a whole new commission should


25 come in into evaluate that application as a conflict

88

1 of interest.

2 If that is not the case, than that

3 application should be tabled. All evaluations

4 should be done. We should truly have a distinct and

5 separate evaluation of the need for pipelines in the

6 state. Then I'm sure we will realize at that time,

7 there was an error in judgment, and that the

8 decision should not be made to approve South Jersey

9 Gas or New Jersey Natural Gas pipelines through the

10 Pinelands.

11 Thank you for this opportunity, and I

12 hope you truly will listen to these concerns. Thank

13 you.


15 comments.

16 The next person to give comments is

17 Margo Pellegrino.

18 MS. PELLEGRINO: Hi. I am Margo

19 Pellegrino I'm a Burlington County resident. I'm

20 here -- this is my daughter, my daughter and my

21 daughter and my son. And that's why I'm here today,

22 because this is their future we are discussing.

23 Back in 2011 I was also testifying

24 and was told I should go home and find the stats on


25 the jobs and how much solar would bolster our

89

1 State's economy and all this stuff. And I just have

2 a feeling that that would have been wasted energy,

3 so I didn't do it.

4 It was kind of funny listening to

5 that guy talking about -- he was one of the gas

6 people, talking about the generators and how each

7 house needs its own gas line, so that we can have a

8 gas generator. You know, that made me think of like

9 you know, the dude on the street corner, who sells

10 his pot for little bit less than everybody else,

11 gets you hooked on it, then starts jacking up the

12 price. And you know that is going to happen if we

13 are using one fuel constantly. And we've got

14 pipelines all over the state. You know, how diverse

15 is that? That is not very diverse. It also makes

16 me think of a story.

17 I spent some time hanging on the

18 various coasts, from Florida up to Maine, talking to

19 people. I didn't realize Florida used to be so

20 cool. Back in the 60s and 70s, most people got --

21 they solar powered hot water heaters. Then in the

22 60s and 70s, the power company in Florida provided

23 incentives to get folks to switch over from solar

24 hot water heaters, to hot water heaters dependant


25 on coal burning power plants. It created more

90

1 dependance on the grid and power companies. It

2 killed invasion and well, hell it killed solar

3 powered hot water heaters. And increased the cost

4 of hot water for the people. Nevermind the mercury

5 in the fish down there. By the way, if you go

6 fishing in the Everglades, they do tell you not to

7 eat the fish because they're so high in mercury

8 because of the coal-burning power plants. So I

9 guess that at least -- hopefully, we are going to

10 kill that.

11 But any way it's this type of thing

12 is what we are seeing with gas pipelines everywhere.

13 Let's get people hooked on gas, then jack up the

14 prices. Of course energy costs will go up, once we

15 become an export nation. Which we know is where we

16 are heading at present. Because you know the E.U.

17 wants gas from the U.S. not Russia.

18 I wish the BPU would do what is best

19 for the people of New Jersey, not the power

20 companies and conglomerates. You know, all who they

21 are, so do we. We all know clean energy sources,

22 solar, wind, geothermal and even tidal energy are

23 the way to go. We all know we should never have

24 been pulled from RGGI, at a loss of 50 million a


25 year, plus all those jobs. We all know that, of

91

1 course, the taxpayers do benefit from the

2 significant savings, when most energy efficient

3 power generation technology is used.

4 Here is a hint B.L. England currently

5 limping along with duct tape and chewing gum,

6 holding it together and violating the Clean Water

7 Act, ain't it. And really the best way to serve the

8 people is to diversify the grid, with renewables and

9 as much of power generated individually, as much as

10 possible, no antiquated power lines needed.

11 So why not provide incidents to

12 people, using that 50 million the governor lost for

13 us by pulling out of RGGI, maybe we should go in to

14 RGGI, so we can get that 50 million a year, to make

15 their homes more efficient, as well as to generate

16 their own power.

17 Mr. Hay was dead on. I mean that --

18 current way we are transmitting energy via line,

19 it's like 100 years old now. 40 percent of all

20 power generated is lost in transmission, what a

21 waste. How can you even say that you are looking

22 for energy efficiency? Get rid of the grid. Shrink

23 it, dissolve it.

24 And gas lines going to people's homes


25 are not the answer, not when climate change is

92

1 sinking New Jersey's coast, which is forcing people

2 -- the sinking by the way it's a geological

3 phenomenon. I have a cousin who is like a hydraulic

4 geologist or geologically hydrologist, however you

5 want to say, explain it to me what is happening with

6 our coast. We are sinking. So climate change,

7 believe it or not -- you don't want to address it,

8 you can put blinders on; it's happening. Sea level

9 rise is happening. The coasts are sinking. People

10 are moving out.

11 I don't know, if you've driven around

12 South Jersey lately, especially the Delaware

13 Bayshore, it's getting to be kind of desolate. The

14 BPU needs to do -- to stop and to do right by the

15 people.

16 And decentralize the grid,

17 incentivize a lot of folks to generate their own

18 power, using solar, wind, geothermal, wow-wee, talk

19 about job creation, so we don't lose power for week

20 a year, which is by the way, what we lose on average

21 in our house. Because of all the superstorms we

22 have.

23 I live in Medford Lakes and in 2004,

24 we had the thousand year storm. It wacked our dams.


25 In 2005, we had the 100 year storm, it filled up all

93

1 the lakes, without dams. And then the next year we

2 had a derecho, then we have some other things, then

3 there was Hurricaine Sandy, then there was another

4 derecho. I mean come on guys, this is just my

5 little town. We're seeing this all the time. Don't

6 even talk about sea level rise and storms smacking

7 the people --

8 The Delaware Bayshore, man, Sandy was

9 not the only game going. You can go paddle on the

10 Mulica River, you will see signs, little Alligators

11 holding -- this one family has an alligators in the

12 yard, little statues, in the back yard, saying we

13 survived Irene. I am planning a paddle next year

14 from Chicago down to New Orleans. And I was

15 actually going to go down the Mississippi. But I

16 have been told it's desolate. There is no one there

17 to reach out to. You know why? The flood plain has

18 increased that much on the Mississippi River. So

19 come on.

20 Actually you know what, to heck with

21 the rest of what I wrote. Against, the background,

22 this the background, that you have the energy

23 management Master Plan -- the background is this:

24 What appears to be complete corruption and collusion


25 in what has happened in the Pinelands. It's

94

1 debacle.

2 You have commissioners that were

3 instantly replaced after their no vote. You have

4 the recusal of Ed Lloyd. And in fact when he --

5 PRESIDENT MROZ: I'm going to have to

6 ask you to, I think, restructure your comments,

7 you're going way over time and --

8 MS. PELLEGRINO: I'm the first person

9 that you've said that to. And guess what, I bet

10 you, I guaranty you --

11 PRESIDENT MROZ: As I said in my

12 opening remarks --

13 MS. PELLEGRINO: Well, I'm sorry but

14 the appearance of collusion and being in the pockets

15 of the power companies, greatly colors this, master

16 plan. That is all I have to say about that.


18 The next speaker is Tom Dougherty,

19 and if you could indicate whether you represent an

20 organization or have an affiliation.

21 MR. DOUGHERTY: No. I am just a

22 citizen. I pay money to the electric company and in

23 New Gretna, now the town is upgrading to natural

24 gas. My background is as a mechanical engineer and


25 I worked at Polaroid for 20 years or so, but

95

1 nowadays I'm retired. I did a lot of work with

2 ASME, the America Society of Mechanical Engineers.

3 And so that is bit of my background.

4 My remarks, I want to -- I have a

5 couple of categories that I want to talk about.

6 Market mechanisms for shifting the community towards

7 the goals that you wish, the secure energy, the

8 clean energy and affordable energy. I want to talk

9 about the market mechanisms, ideas on how to do

10 that.

11 Also I want to talk about the

12 important distinction between natural gas, one type

13 of natural gas is clean because the wells can be

14 sealed. Another type of natural gas is dirty

15 because the wells cannot be sealed. The ones that

16 go through shale rock, it's difficult to seal them.

17 The third category I want to talk

18 about is the climate change, these wild weather

19 patterns. In particular, Sandy because it came up

20 the coast and took a left and hit New Gretna

21 directly, and lot of other folks. It was unusual.

22 But I want to talk about the mechanics of weather a

23 little bit.

24 And then lastly, my favorite energy


25 forums, I've learned so much from others. I have a

96

1 short list of my favorites.

2 Then I have idea for a name change on

3 your Board to give you a different name or strategy

4 if you will.

5 So in that organization first market

6 maintenance. Energy is like a product. And

7 services we buy or products we buy, it's products

8 and there are hidden costs. I associate my remarks

9 on the lost externalities. The hidden costs are not

10 seen, so the market doesn't work right. But there

11 are hidden costs. What you want in this market, is

12 you have both positive products, that they push us

13 in a good direction, positive choices or negative

14 choices, that push us in the wrong direction.

15 So right off the bat, it implies, if

16 you want the market to work right, you want the

17 citizens, consumers and businesses to have a signal

18 that pushes them in the right direction. We want

19 things to go this way. So it implies that you want

20 both a rebate and/or and a penalty, depending on

21 which choices they are making. So you can imagine

22 lining up the products on a scale each year and

23 rating them with your experts and saying, here is

24 the middle, everybody is choosing this. Those on


25 this side, they get a rebate those on this side they

97

1 get a tax penalty, the money goes to pay for the

2 rebate. So the government doesn't take in more

3 taxes. It's a motivating system, through maybe

4 something like a sales tax, like you can replace the

5 sales tax and make it into a, shall we call it a

6 social tax slash rebate, at the point of purchase.

7 The idea of motivating to the point of purchase, is

8 if you do things through the tax code, it only

9 happens once a year, people don't get motivated with

10 that. If they see it where they are buying it, they

11 see it, get information, react and make better

12 choices. So that's the idea on market mechanism,

13 shifting everybody towards where you want to go.

14 The natural gas category, the shale

15 rock, you know, Professor Graf at Cornell, he is a

16 rock engineer. He has taught a lot of the petroleum

17 engineers. There's no way to seal the horizontally

18 drilled fracked wells in the shale rock structure.

19 The gas leaking out, it goes up in the atmosphere.

20 It's bad news. So like ethical energy or ethical

21 electric. On my electric bill I can buy from

22 ethical electric, electricity that comes from a

23 clean source. And I do that right away. I'm doing

24 that now.


25 I don't have solar panels or wind,

98

1 but because my bill is split between the source and

2 the distribution, I can chose a vendor from the

3 source of energy and they are wholesaling, getting

4 the wind energy from out in the Midwest, somewhere

5 it's coming through the grid to my house. So I feel

6 good, because I'm buying my energy in a clean way.

7 Now, with natural gas you can have a

8 similar thing. I don't know because I haven't

9 received a bill yet from New Jersey Gas. We are

10 just in the process of hooking up to that in New

11 Gretna. So I'm just getting contractors to put a

12 different boiler and a different burner in. But I'm

13 hoping to get a gas bill split between the source of

14 gas and the distribution of gas. Maybe I'm still

15 going to have gas distributed by New Jersey Gas.

16 But maybe I can buy my source of natural gas from a

17 vendor out there, somewhere that is clean, that is

18 verified clean. I don't want to buy gas from these

19 frackers, crazy well drillers out there, who have

20 leaks.

21 Every new fracked well in the shale

22 rock structure, within a year, 10 percent of them

23 are leaking. So you know you have got to

24 distinguish between the dirty natural gas and the


25 clean natural gas. So any way.

99

1 On the last two categories, the

2 climate change, wild weather. The climate change is

3 definitely real. You can look at the glaciers. The

4 receding of the ice and all that stuff. We have to

5 do something about that. But 30 billion dollars to

6 rebuild from Sandy. Imagine if something like that

7 happens this fall, happens again the following fall.

8 You can be in a situation where that's the new

9 normal.

10 Why do you have a new normal? Talk

11 to Dr. Frances at Rutgers University. What she is

12 saying is that the polar cap is reduced, it's 40

13 percent of what it used to be. So you have a polar

14 cap that is basically warmer up there in the north

15 pole. The equator is about the same. So the

16 temperature difference is smaller. So what's going

17 on? The jet stream is moving slower from west to

18 east. So the weather system comes along, and

19 whatever weather it is, dry, drought, so you're

20 going to have more wild fires, as it moves because

21 it's staying there longer. As it's going along

22 slower, more crazy rain, dumping more rain. The

23 jet stream is going slower, because climate change

24 reduced the temperature difference between the north


25 pole and the equator. So the jet stream is going

100

1 along slower. That also impacts storms coming up

2 the coast. You saw Sandy go up, it was very usual

3 for that storm to, boom, go left. If the jet stream

4 was stronger on average, I'm talking about on

5 average, that would have kept going off to New

6 England, as it normally would.

7 This wild weather is definitely a

8 change. It seems related to climate change. We

9 have to take it serious, for our kids and grand

10 kids, you know. You know, the rest of us you and I

11 will be gone shortly, but our kids and grand kids.

12 We've only got another decade.

13 PRESIDENT MROZ: I went to the doctor

14 this morning.

15 MR. DOUGHERTY: But then, this is my

16 last my last, favorite, energy forums. I have

17 learned so much from folks here in the room. Wind,

18 both offshore and onshore. You know maybe five or

19 eight years ago I sketched wind mill farm along the

20 parkway there. There is plenty of wind along the

21 parkway there. And you hook up to the high voltage

22 lines. You don't have to have a long wire to

23 connect them. Onshore and offshore wind. That

24 makes sense.


25 Solar, totally and I'm with this.

101

1 This gentleman here, community solar, individual

2 solar. Panels here or elsewhere and sourced through

3 the grid, solar, solar and wind. And insulation

4 efficiency. The gentleman here, I totally associate

5 my remarks with him, Klaus Rittenbach, here on the

6 passive house idea. My goodness, I have such an old

7 house and insulation efficiency. If you can tighten

8 up that house, we don't need as much.

9 That is a favorite. Certainly deep

10 rock geotherm. Seems we a need proof of test here,

11 R and D. So these are my favorites.

12 Lastly, name change for the Board.

13 Board of Public Utilities. It's hard to tell what

14 you are about. If you were to call yourselves

15 something like, Energy Products and Services

16 Authority. I am thinking about that, it's very

17 clear what you are up to at that point. Board of

18 Public Utilities, is kind of like well I don't know

19 what they are. You know. So you know, thank you.


21 comments.

22 The next three speakers are in this

23 order; Elaina Smith, George is it Georgina Shanley,

24 and Marget Messier Jackson.


25 MS. SMITH: I am from Food and Water

102

1 Watch. If there was one thing that Hurricane Sandy

2 taught us, it was not that we need to increase the

3 State's dirt energy infrastructure and fossil fuel

4 dependence; but that we must focus our energy and

5 restructure developments on renewable energy

6 infrastructure. New Jersey must accelerate the

7 transition into a safe, clean energy future,

8 increase economic security and resiliency and reduce

9 inequity and carbon pollution.

10 The Board of Public Utilities and

11 thereby the Energy Master Plan must acknowledge

12 climate change and implement an energy strategy that

13 accomplishes fossil fuel independence by the year

14 2050.

15 Despite popular theories, fracked gas

16 is not a bridge fuel, and should not be championed

17 as such, if we want to avoid catastrophic warming we

18 need to get off of all fossil fuels. A study

19 released in 2012, by the National Center for

20 Atmospheric Research, concluded that substitution of

21 gas for coal as an energy source results in

22 increased rather than decreased global warming for

23 many decades. During fracking large amounts of

24 methane, a potent greenhouse gas that makes up more


25 than 90 percent of shale gas leaks during fracking.

103

1 For New Jersey that means no more, no

2 fracking, no fracking waste, and no fracking related

3 infrastructure. Especially fracked gas pipelines,

4 oil bomb train, L and D facilities and offshore

5 drilling. We must eliminate that reliance on fossil

6 fuels and nuclear fuels.

7 Instead the New Jersey energy

8 infrastructure must shift to renewable energy

9 essentially solar and wind power, and become a hot

10 bed for manufacturing and research and development

11 for green technology. That, coupled with the

12 increases in renewables and efficiency construction

13 installation and maintenance finance jobs will

14 assist the work force as labor demands shift in the

15 evolving economy.

16 Additionally, we must reduce existing

17 equity and environmental justice issues by insuring

18 vulnerable communities, especially benefit from

19 reductions in fossil fuel-related air pollution,

20 emissions reduction, and have fair access to all

21 aspects of the development utilization of green

22 technology.

23 If New Jersey wishes to be a leader

24 in climate change, they must reject fracked gas


25 infrastructure and choose a renewable future.

104


2 comments.

3 The next is Georgina Shanley. Good

4 afternoon.

5 MS. SHANLEY: Good afternoon. My

6 name is Georgina Shanley. And I represent Citizens

7 United for Renewable Energy, CURE. And it is a

8 five-county, South Jersey group that was formed in

9 2010, after the gulf spill. And we are saying that

10 the game is over for fossil fuel. It's done. It's

11 like yesterday's news.

12 We're seeing in the last 20 years,

13 the polar ice caps have melted faster than in the

14 last 10,000 years. Scientist Hanson from NASA, has

15 said that in 50 years our sea level will rise 10

16 feet. That water from the ice caps has to go

17 somewhere.

18 So we really need a huge change in

19 the goals and in the Energy Master Plan. Number

20 one, no more fossil fuel infrastructure in the State

21 of New Jersey. Include climate change in your whole

22 mandate. Renewables should be Number 1, 2 and 3,

23 and get back into RGGI.

24 We need an Energy Master Plan based


25 on facts expertise and science, not on politics and

105

1 industry.

2 I would like to just read what

3 Governor Christie told Iowa was farmers on the 31st

4 of July of this year, talking about the EPA and Lisa

5 Jackson, who is the New Jersey DEP head. He said,

6 this is Christie; I saw the damage she caused in New

7 Jersey, and I replaced her. We have worked to make

8 the DEP much more business friendly, more

9 transparent and more cooperative with our customers,

10 the business community in New Jersey. So I had the

11 experience of dismantling the business, unfriendly

12 environment that Lisa Jackson created in New Jersey.

13 I cannot wait to dismantle it at the EPA as well.

14 And what we see before us, the BPU,

15 we have Chairman Mroz, who is the founder of the

16 Energy Coalition in New Jersey, which focuses on

17 fossil fuels, gas. And you and your group are going

18 to vote on this pipeline, transmission gas

19 pipelines, two pipelines now, through the Pinelands.

20 And it's an outright, as Margo Pellegrino said, it's

21 an outright conflict of interest. How can this be?

22 How can that be allowed?

23 We have already seen the long hand of

24 Governor Christie reach into the Pinelands


25 Commission to neuter them on this new gas pipeline.

106

1 Instead, in January 2014 there was a vote against

2 the pipeline. And low and behold we change a few

3 words, the BPU approves it. And here we have it

4 back at the BPU to have it approved again. In spite

5 of it being in violation of the Comprehensive

6 Management Plan. So not only do you not have

7 respect for the people of New Jersey and environment

8 of New Jersey, but you don't have respect for the

9 laws of New Jersey, and also federal laws that

10 govern the Pinelands Commission.

11 At the last hearing, the Commission

12 was overseen by Mr. Fiordaliso -- yes, tap him

13 because time is running out, because we have

14 selective enforcement here of time. For those who

15 are industry like Mr. Jackson and other people here,

16 you are allowed so much more time than anybody who

17 has an opinion that is different. So please bear

18 with me.

19 Mr. Fiordaliso had the last BPU dog

20 and pony show, AKA, public hearing in Upper

21 Township. It was to do with the pipeline through

22 the Pinelands. He said, I am here to hear your

23 voices to listen to your information, to gather all

24 of this and bring it back, so we can have a


25 discussions, and you are very valued. Fast forward

107

1 a couple weeks, we go to Trenton. There is not even

2 a discussion. There is not even an issue on how

3 many people objected. 95 percent of the people at

4 the public hearing objected to this pipeline. It

5 doesn't matter. We really don't count. No matter

6 what we say or no matter how many hours of research

7 we have done. We really don't count. It doesn't

8 matter. We are really nothing, because the BPU is

9 in the hands of industry, the people who are running

10 the BPU are industry people and the industry gives

11 contributions to see politicians. And so it's a

12 rigged game. And it's very, very sad.

13 We had over 19,000 signatures against

14 that pipeline. Does that matter? No.

15 You have a chance for redemption, and

16 even the Pope has talked about climate change. But

17 you have your chance for redemption and you can stop

18 this pipeline, these two pipelines through the

19 Pinelands. And really go back to the drawing board

20 and think seriously what these incredible people who

21 have come here and given up their day to come here

22 today to speak to you. I respect you as people and

23 I would hope you would rise to a higher good and do

24 what is best for the people of New Jersey, the


25 environment of New Jersey and our future

108

1 generations.


3 comments.

4 The next speaker is Marget Messinger

5 Jackson. Okay.

6 The next several people on the list

7 are Steven, I will hopefully get it right, Fenichel,

8 Glen Clots and Bill Wolf. And I guess it's

9 Dr. Fenichel.

10 DR. FENICHEL: I just hope that what

11 you are hearing today you guys will get right. I am

12 representing Physicians For Social Responsibility.

13 That is a group that I would hope that the BPU might

14 try to understand, what our physicians' group has

15 it's concerns with the impacts, the health impacts

16 of climate change.

17 Human generated greenhouse gas

18 emissions are warming the climate. The threats to

19 health posed by climate change are multiple, and

20 increasingly severe. Warming generates more

21 frequent and intense heat waves, extreme weather

22 events, shore line loss, flooding and drought, air

23 and water pollution and agricultural losses. These

24 in tern have health consequences. Heat-related


25 illness and death. Storm driven mortality and

109

1 injuries. Allergies, asthma and other conditions

2 exacerbated by pollution. Insect and water borne

3 diseases. Poor nutrition and lessened food

4 security.

5 And what recently came out in an

6 article by a professor at MIT is mental disorders

7 related to the environmental changes caused by

8 things such as the ultrafine particles that are

9 emitted when fracked gas is burned. You see, the

10 coal particles are effectively filtered by the cilia

11 in the nose. Those are your little hairs that are

12 able to remove those toxic emissions. But the

13 ultrafine particles, once they're in the nose go

14 directly to the brain. And there is a great concern

15 on the part of epidemiologists that we are rushing

16 into this thing before the science can come up with

17 a convincing proof that an increase in Alzheimer's

18 disease and Parkinsons disease is related to these

19 unfiltered, ultrafine particles. Which the industry

20 is trying to say, trying to convince us that we are

21 replacing dirty coal with clean, fracked gas.

22 Well, fracked gas is anything but

23 clean. It's a dirty lie as to what they're trying

24 to sell. And I hope that the health concerns of a


25 group of Physicians For Social Responsibility might

110

1 have some influence in what you discuss behind

2 closed doors.

3 I would also appeal to you to release

4 transcripts on those behind closed doors

5 discussions. Because I spoke to one of the

6 Commissioners involved with the Upper Township

7 hearing, about all the people giving testimony

8 against the pipeline going through the Pinelands.

9 And I was to be reassured that, we did discuss it

10 behind closed doors of course, where it's trust me,

11 trust me. Where the ultimate result of what that

12 testimony led to when a July 22nd, no discussion,

13 unanimous decision to go ahead with allowing the

14 pipeline; I lost confidence in the integrity of the

15 BPU totally.

16 I would also say at that meeting,

17 that was a painful awakening, because all of you

18 people as Commissioners, attractive both,

19 emotionally and personally. You seem like good

20 people. But the results of what you, do strongly

21 suggest that there is -- it's a dirty secret what's

22 going on. That basically you get salaries ranging

23 from the president of 140,000 to the commissioners

24 of 125,000, and what is the function?


25 It would seem from that experience at

111

1 that Upper Township meeting, that you are to make

2 the fingerprints of the Christie, the Van Drews and

3 these other politicians who are looking forward to

4 those campaign contributions for their next step up

5 the political food chain, by having you do the work

6 that obscures the fingerprints of the puppet

7 masters. And it's very, very disappointing as a

8 citizen of New Jersey.

9 I too believe that public hearing is

10 truly a meaningless thing. Especially, with the

11 BPU. If, a public hearing, who is listening? Who

12 is listening to the people at a so-called hearing?

13 I got a sense in speaking to that

14 commissioner that behind closed doors the listening

15 is to the politicians who give the marching orders

16 based on their contributions. And I would love to

17 be proven that that was something that would be

18 rectified.

19 A gentleman talked about a new

20 acronym for the BPU. I believe that is should

21 definitely be for something different than the Board

22 of Public Utilities, because again I don't see the

23 public at all in the process. And I did come up

24 with I think a more apt acronym for this


25 organization. And I must say it's with heart fell

112

1 sorrow, that I know now that the real meaning of BPU

2 should be the Board of Perfidy Unlimited.

3 Thank you.

4 PRESIDENT MROZ: The next speaker is

5 Glen Clotz, and Mr. Clotz if you have an affiliation

6 please say so.

7 MR. CLOTZ: I do. Good afternoon.

8 My name is Glen Clotz. I'm a member of a chapter

9 350.org, South Jersey 350.org.

10 I am here today specifically to give

11 the Board a heads up about developing situation

12 first I want to talk about 350.org we were

13 specifically organized 8 years ago to address the

14 harmful effects caused by the growing amounts of

15 greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, primarily CO2 as

16 well others such as Methane, also viewed as natural

17 gas. Unfortunately, these gases are being dumped in

18 to our atmosphere in ever increasing amounts. And

19 we are tasked basically to focus primarily on the

20 effects. And they're of course not good.

21 Today though I want to focus on one

22 major effect. And that is has been mentioned here,

23 but I -- I want to talk about a slightly different

24 variety of it and that's sea rise. Many of the


25 speakers have talked about sea rise. However, I

113

1 want to talk about something different. I want to

2 talk about the possibility of near-term rapid sea

3 rise, a much more frightening term than merely sea

4 rise.

5 A recent scientific paper that I have

6 here and I will put on the record, Ice Melt Sea

7 Level Rise and Superstorms, published in the Journal

8 of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, this past July

9 by a team of some of the worlds top climate and

10 ocean scientists, headed by Dr. James Hanson, has

11 predicted that it's very possible that we can be

12 experiencing up to 20 feet of sea level rise in the

13 course of the next 30 to 50 years. And that this

14 will very likely occur in a nonlinear fashion.

15 Even if this team is half right, New

16 Jersey is going to have an enormous problem that

17 will directly impact this Board's mandate. Ten feet

18 of sea level rise would drown most of the coastal

19 barrier islands, as well as many of the tidal river

20 cities and towns in New Jersey. There is as you

21 know an enormous amount of power infrastructure in

22 and around coastal tidal river and bay areas, that

23 would need to be either abandoned, moved inland or

24 protected under such circumstances.


25 It is our concern that the Board is

114

1 already planing to give approvals for the creation

2 of more infrastructure in these areas. Such as the

3 retrofitting of B.L. England power plant and the gas

4 pipeline that is necessary to complete that project.

5 As the Board is well aware, that plant sits at sea

6 level now, and nothing in any of the plans to

7 convert it to using natural gas that we have heard

8 of take into consideration what would happen to it,

9 if it the sea suddenly rises.

10 It should also be noted that B.L.

11 England is sitting on ground that is subsiding or

12 sinking. So if you add the rate of sinking to the

13 rapidly rising sea level being predicted, it doesn't

14 take much imagination to picture what that

15 eventually will mean I would like to add this an

16 enormous investment here. I think I have heard the

17 figure bandied about of 4 hundred million dollars.

18 As a ratepayer, I'm concerned about a project that

19 could possibly be under water before it ever pays

20 out.

21 So I'm not happy about that.

22 Although our group desires to see New Jersey rapidly

23 convert to solar and wind energy for an ever

24 increasing percentage of our electrical power; we


25 also do not want to see large amounts of new

115

1 electrical infrastructure being placed in the

2 coastal zone under these circumstances going

3 forward. An exception would be ocean-based wind

4 mill farms. Fortunately, even a rising sea level

5 will only have an minor impact on these kinds of

6 devices.

7 Dr. Hanson's team and 350.org's

8 concern is that if the world's nations can't bring

9 increasing amounts of greenhouse gas production and

10 their use under control in the near future; it's

11 likely we'll be seeing some version of this sea

12 level rise scenario sooner than later.

13 South Jersey 350.org would therefore

14 request that the New Jersey BPU form a special

15 committee to study this issue. And in doing so

16 consult with our best climate and ocean scientists

17 in and out of New Jersey, as regards to this

18 particular issue.

19 Never before in the course of human

20 civilization have we had to deal rapid sea level

21 rise. We must start to take into account dramatic

22 change in our society's orientation to the global

23 ocean. The good news is there is still time for

24 this Board to start planning for the very real


25 possibility of this rise. But there is not much

116

1 time. Many of the large scale coastal projects you

2 folks are being presented with will be created to la

3 far past the 50 year time frame we have mentioned

4 here, that I have mentioned here.

5 Let me be clear on this point, the

6 sea will not suddenly stop rising now, even if we

7 manage to lower the amounts of greenhouse gas we are

8 presentee burning, and sadly we have no indication

9 that that's going to happen any time soon.

10 Therefore it's a very good bet that a

11 20 foot sea rise in New Jersey is already baked into

12 this equation. Unfortunately and sadly, even then

13 the ocean will continue to rise for many centuries,

14 even millennia thereafter.

15 These same scientists tell us in

16 their view, the best we can hope for now is to slow

17 the rate of rise, while we learn to adapt to it's

18 consequences.

19 So in conclusion, I would like to say

20 350.org that this Board is facing a pivotal time in

21 New Jersey's history, a time of rapid and sustained

22 change that requires it to act and act swiftly to

23 deal with this looming threat. To do nothing under

24 these circumstances would in amount to a breach of


25 the public trust and a shameful abandonment of your

117

1 responsibilities. To do the wrong thing and just go

2 ahead as if things were always going to stay the

3 same as they were in the past, would also be

4 dereliction of your mandate. We therefore request

5 that this create a special committee to examine and

6 address this extremely, serious situation, then

7 hopefully make a provision for it in the developing

8 Master Plan.


10 Next speaker is Bill Wolfe, if you

11 have an affiliation or represent somebody, please

12 indicate that.

13 MR. WOLFE: Good afternoon, Bill

14 Wolfe, I'm from Bordentown. I'm a citizen and I

15 guess a ratepayer but on a much, the economics are

16 much broader than ratepayer. And I, unfortunately,

17 I am disappointed that the ratepayer advocate left

18 because I think she should hear someone like me who

19 thinks about the economics in broader terms.

20 Following up on the prior gentleman's

21 testimony. I think there needs to be a greater

22 sense of urgency and specificity and with respect

23 goals and methodologies with respect to climate

24 change. And the scientists are telling us that what


25 we're seeing now is what is now referred to as

118

1 abrupt, in the climate change as oppose to the

2 linear warming that has been the geological norm of

3 planet. Nonlinear exponential abrupt climate change

4 is what the science is telling us. And all the

5 predictions that have come in and have been

6 conservative, and have been the worse case

7 scenarios, the current data is it consistently

8 exceeding the worst case. Whether it's sea level

9 rise, glacial melt, et cetera. So that is a key

10 point.

11 The gentleman from the Energy

12 Coalition praised the BPU for encouraging, I think

13 over a billion dollars of investment in resilience.

14 I will give one example, the DEP has a policy and a

15 regulation in place in their waste water program

16 it's regulatory; where they're requiring that the

17 plans for infrastructure to address a 500-year storm

18 event. On the water supply side, it's done through

19 policy, through the loan program but the technical

20 objective. The 500-year design storm is part of

21 their regulatory requirements.

22 Has the Board, when you're looking at

23 the elevations of infrastructure that you're

24 financing on the ratepayers' back, are you looking


25 at elevations of the 500-year storm event? And then

119

1 consider the fact that the statistics under those

2 500-year projections are wiped out because they're

3 no longer valid given the change in the underlying

4 dynamics of the climate system. So it's hydrology

5 and weather are fundamentally different. And

6 therefore the projections are going to be a

7 1000-year storm is now a 100-year storm, a 100-year

8 storm is now a 10-year storm.

9 So you know we're seeing real serious

10 problems. So I would just ask the question in fact,

11 is that in fact your policy? What is your technical

12 policy with to elevations with respect to

13 anticipated climate change? Then I can go on a lot

14 more in depth in terms of these kind of mechanical

15 policy and technical methodology that should be part

16 of your planning enterprise.

17 The second point on my list, is that

18 I go back to my involvement with the Board was in

19 the 80s with respect to implementing what was called

20 the macenroe amendments to what was the solid waste

21 crisis. The climate crisis is much more severe than

22 the disposal capacity crisis of the 1980s that

23 prompted the Board to subsidize all kinds of all

24 long-term above market electric contracts. And I,


25 the ratepayer got taken to the cleaners on those

120

1 deals. And there was no reluctance on the part of

2 the Board staff, because for policy reasons, it was

3 determined for policy, we needed to incentivize the

4 industry, and therefore the ratepayers were going to

5 take a bath and we are going to develop in state

6 capacity.

7 I hear rate counsel talk about the

8 cost and the price and the ratepayer concerns, yada,

9 yada. The policy objectives said overwhelm the

10 narrow concerns of rate counsel. And I don't sense

11 that as a matter of fact, I sense the opposite in

12 the that goal of the plan to minimize cost.

13 And that brings me to the third

14 point, with respect to the gentleman who spoke

15 before the break, I don't remember his name, but he

16 focused on the external costs, social cost of

17 carbon. And again, very -- completely agree with

18 everything he said. And the data he presented were

19 on low end ranges of what the real cost of carbon

20 are in dollars per ton. And therefore, your plan

21 should have that component built in with whether

22 it's in the form of a shadow price or whether it's

23 in the form in a numerical value for purposes of

24 planning and procurement, so renewables are going to


25 be of equal or preferential footing, if you've got

121

1 the cost of carbon on the passive side.

2 And other state regulatory, public

3 utility commissions are doing this. In other

4 states, California is doing it. I don't get the

5 sense that New Jersey is doing it at all. And where

6 do see the opportunity for it to be done, in the

7 cost test under the Wind Act, I see exactly the

8 opposite. I see the Board's consultant saying that

9 the market prices is determinative. And that the

10 external cost is zero.

11 So it's a serious issue when you have

12 a statutory mandate to pass a cost test, and there

13 is no methodology to determine what the cost benefit

14 is. And you can even look EPA, OMB has a value a

15 methodology, the EPA has to jump through hoops to

16 get through regulatory procedures. And you're not

17 going to do that. So you need to have these things

18 in your plan in terms of methods and policies.

19 Point three on an ecological front,

20 the plan has a goal to promote in state generation

21 and "clean gas" whether that's pipelines or then

22 coal power plants. And that goal is totally

23 decoupled from the lifecycle of greenhouse gas

24 potential of fracked gas, of any form of gas.


25 And that brings us in to the point,

122

1 you can talk to your staff or Mr. Winka, where we

2 had the solid waste plan that he worked in the 80s

3 and in the 90s when the Florio administration came

4 around, with leadership from the top, tying in the

5 permitting at the DEP and the financing at the DEP

6 and the BPU to numerical goals for source reduction,

7 recycling, et cetera. So this brings into the

8 concept of a policy hierarchy in the plan with

9 numerical goals that certain things are more

10 important than other things. Because your five

11 overarching goals are just thrown out there, and

12 mismatched. Some of them are conflicting. So your

13 policy hierarchy would say, efficiency, renewables

14 are one and two and an option of last resort is

15 fossil.

16 If you're gonna do fossil, you've got

17 to incorporate the real cost of carbon in it and

18 pass the cost out. And shift the whole burden to

19 fossil the way you are shifting the economic burden

20 to win perversely. So again there is methodology in

21 the scientific literature that look at the

22 lifecycle, global warming potential from gas. And

23 these are available. The research is done, you have

24 a staff that can tell you how to do that.


25 Your colleague that you mention at

123

1 the DEP, Mr. Martin is also a former energy

2 consultant. Who also has expertise on that front.

3 And he might help you as well.

4 There are conditions before the board

5 right now, at least that I'm aware of, with respect

6 preempting municipal land use powers under the law

7 use law. And this goes to the question that you are

8 now on with South Jersey Gas, the petition before

9 the Board now to preempt municipal review. And the

10 way the Pinelands Commission works is that on Friday

11 the issue of code and certificate of filing, which

12 essentially defers the Commission's review to the

13 municipal governments. And you've got a situation

14 where South Jersey Gas is before Board to preempt

15 the municipal government review. That's put the

16 Board in the role of essentially reviewing the CNP

17 requirements.

18 Since other people have testified

19 with respect to the fact the BPU represented South

20 Jersey Gas as an applicant before the Commission.

21 And Board has issued three orders, three, count them

22 approving various aspects of the South Jersey Gas

23 pipeline. This is a very, very perverse scenario

24 that we have here, from an institutional and


25 regulatory standpoint. I don't know how in the

124

1 world anybody could have anticipated that we would

2 have a case like this.

3 I urge you look at that and as a

4 matter of policy impose a moratorium on any further

5 preemption under the municipal land use law for

6 infrastructure or any energy infrastructure,

7 including pipeline.

8 I made notes here. I will close on

9 this one, because I -- your opening remarks describe

10 the Energy Master Plan as strategic vision document.

11 I think those were your words. And that is what I

12 thought it was about too until I -- I am not a

13 practitioner with respect to BPU and energy issues.

14 I focus on the environmental side at DEP. But I did

15 read closely the Board's order, because I was deeply

16 involved in the South Jersey Gas Pinelands pipeline.

17 The most recent order effective August 1, it was

18 July 22, I think issued and it had language that I

19 was frankly surprised by. It says that Board orders

20 and state agencies had to comport their approvals,

21 quote, to the maximum extent feasible with respect

22 to Energy Master Plan. And it cited a statute, I

23 was unaware of statutory basis of that. I was

24 unaware that there maximum feasible consistency


25 requirement under state law. Therefore that means

125

1 the Board has enormous power to put teeth in the

2 plan.

3 The regulatory plan, Wall Street

4 likes regulatory certainty. I listened very closely

5 to the testimony of the energy coalition. They want

6 certainty. I want certainty. I want regulatory

7 certainty, I want regulatory standards in the Energy

8 Master Plan, that says you can't get fossil

9 infrastructure until you do the following things and

10 some of them deal with, you know, the hierarchy of

11 demonstrating that had you've exhausted all energy

12 efficiency and you have exhausted all renewables and

13 you incorporated the social cost of carbon. And you

14 have life cycle carbon accounting. Those kinds of

15 things are what you should be doing. And a other

16 state utility regulatory commissions are doing those

17 things.

18 And let's be clear, given this

19 current governor's posture on energy and climate, it

20 isn't going to happen. And let's also be clear that

21 with leadership, and I spent my career experience

22 with leadership that good things can happen, and I

23 will point to what happened during the Florio

24 administration with respect to changing the State's


25 solid waste policy, and coming up with an aggressive

126

1 plan. You know and I know that it can happen. But

2 it's not happening. Let's be honest and point the

3 finger where it lies and it's with the governor.

4 And let's at least have the technical staff create

5 an honest document that the governor could then say

6 I don't support. And if the Board is purely an

7 independent regulatory agency, that is what you

8 should do. And you should have your plan publicly

9 presented and rejected by the administration. So

10 there is at least a political accountability.

11 And in closing, I hope I don't -- I'm

12 going to take exception to some of what I thought

13 was a little paternalistic on your part, with

14 respect to the establishing rules for what you

15 described as decorum. And I hope I don't step over

16 the decorum line here, but other have alluded to it

17 in much harsher language than I, but to me to have

18 to President of the Board of Public Utilities as a

19 former lobbyist for the energy coalition or an

20 establishing, a founding member of the then

21 coalition, and at the same time to have the

22 Commissioner of the State Department of

23 Environmental Protection, a former energy industry

24 consultant, and has spent his career there with no


25 career in public service, no career in the

127

1 environment, no training; to have those two people

2 to be the key presiders over the energy policy of

3 New Jersey is a farce. Thank you.

4 PRESIDENT MROZ: The next three

5 people that will speak are Deborah Flag, Macy Wright

6 and Eric Sander.

7 MS. FLAG: Good job everybody.

8 As you heard my name is Deborah Flag.

9 I'm a mom of a 35-year-old who has Autism. And my

10 business partner and I created a non-profit

11 organization. And our focus is to create homes for

12 Autistic adults that's focus is on providing green

13 living with sustainable methods. I am also a

14 graduate of Thomas Edison with a Bachelors Degree.

15 That's why I chose to be an advocate instead of a

16 politician.

17 Thank you for giving me this

18 opportunity to express my opinions. I would like to

19 take a moment to commend those who have educated

20 themselves on facts and solutions for preventing

21 further damage to our environment. This is my

22 second hearing regarding the issue of the gas lines.

23 I read many posts and comments that supports banning

24 the idea. And other who feel it would benefit the


25 community by providing many comforts in their homes.

128

1 Had it not been for the expert opinions of

2 scientists who are much more qualified than

3 political figure heads, who help line the pockets of

4 their wealthy executive friends, not to mention

5 having already signed sealed and now close to

6 delivery of this deal, you might have been able to

7 sway our trust.

8 Thank God for those of us who stand

9 firm on opposing this decision. Nothing has

10 changed. Speaking of God whether, you believe or

11 you don't. Someone or something created this planet

12 and everything on it. This place we call Earth was

13 meant to provide clean air and water, healthy soil

14 for growing food, and for some animals to feed their

15 carnivorous appetites, not to hang on their walls or

16 tortured. Because those of you have chosen to

17 cunningly provide a series of discussions for public

18 opinion, that was irrelevant from the beginning, I

19 will leave you with this: Times are changing and

20 people are more educated about the environment. We

21 know about renewable energy and what the competitive

22 market it provides. We also know it would provide a

23 quality of life for future generations, including

24 yours. But let this be your wake up call for every


25 single one of you who continue with self-serving,

129

1 destructive practices we also have another power and

2 you will see those numbers come election time.

3 Power to the people.


5 Our next speaker is Macy Wright. And

6 Mr. Wright if you have an affiliation or represent

7 some organization, please tell us.

8 MR. WRIGHT: Good afternoon. I'm a

9 76-year-old resident of the State of New Jersey, who

10 was born and raised in the Pinelands for a number of

11 years, until I moved to Brigantine, New Jersey in

12 1989.

13 Who am I here to represent? I am

14 here to represent my 8 grandchildren, I'm here to

15 represent my 4 children. I'm here to represent all

16 of those relatives that I left still living in the

17 Pinelands. I have seen what has happened. I

18 remember when I was a young man walking along the

19 Great Egg Harbor River, and when the power lines

20 came by and the utility companies came by and said,

21 there will be no destruction, there will be no

22 interference, there was. I watched the destruction.

23 Why is there destruction? There is

24 some 988,000 acres, 1.1 million acres by the United


25 States Government, the Forest Service are dedicated

130

1 for protection, since then its been decimated on a

2 regular basis. In fact, the Executive Director of

3 the Pinelands Commission said, hey we are protecting

4 450,000 acres thoroughly. But, in fact, what

5 happened to the rest? What is it? The other --

6 it's not even half of what it was supposed to be

7 protected.

8 I heard mentioned here today, if we

9 run that pipeline through the Pinelands that part of

10 the DEP's or somebody's plan, is there will be more

11 residents. You have now 300,000 residents in the

12 reserve set up by the state and 900,000 residents

13 throughout the whole Pinelands Reserve.

14 I live in Brigantine, I was there

15 when Sandy was there, I stayed when Sandy was there.

16 There was a hurricane one, not two, three, four or

17 five. I have been in hurricane three and four. And

18 I can tell you, there was no reason, no reason for

19 there destruction in Brigantine, except one. That

20 was people were able to get by and not pay attention

21 to what was needed to protect the land area. The

22 bays came up, came back, where homes should not have

23 been built. Overdevelopment. And that is what we

24 are having in the Pinelands. I'm watching it. You


25 can see. It you don't have to be my age to watch

131

1 it.

2 I wasn't going to talk today. I

3 wasn't going to come here. Why? Frankly, I agree I

4 think it's a dog and pony show. I read somewhere a

5 long time ago, and may be it's my 76-years -- but I

6 don't think so, because I read a long time ago to

7 watch a wrong and not speak up is a greater wrong.

8 So here I am.

9 I don't hold anything personally

10 against you, you or anybody else, on the Commission.

11 But I don't trust you, I don't trust you, I won't

12 buy a used car from you. I watched what happened to

13 the Commission. I watched what the executive -- you

14 shut the other woman down -- that's okay. You can

15 shut me down. I have been shut down before.

16 I watched the executive director of

17 the Pinelands Commission, how she maneuvered and how

18 you guys went along with maneuvering. This is a

19 done deal. I don't believe you. There is nothing

20 going to come out of this. This is a done deal.

21 Those pipelines are going to go through. And that

22 that's a damn shame.

23 Maybe there is a part of you that

24 says hey my political affiliation, my coopting -- by


25 the way I don't care about Wall Street certainty,

132

1 because I think that is where all this leads to.

2 You have been coopted, politically coopted. It's

3 there. It's on the record. But maybe somewhere,

4 one of you beyond being coopted, you will say, I

5 have the decency to say this is wrong and vote to

6 change your policy. Change your management plan.

7 I listen experts come up here, and

8 they tell me they haven't done this, you haven't

9 done that. There is things that should have been

10 done, and you didn't do it. I hope you do the right

11 thing. God bless.


13 The next speaker is Eric Sanders.

14 MR. SANDERS: Hello. I wanted you to

15 know whether I signed up, I was last person to sign

16 up to speak. I don't know if that is true any more.

17 I thought you would want to know that.

18 PRESIDENT MROZ: There are others.

19 MR. SANDERS: I mean, I don't know

20 how you do it, my attention span is about 20 minutes

21 on a good day. This had been a long hearing. I'm

22 here not really affiliated with anyone, except I

23 live in a shore community. And I want you to

24 understand what climate change and sea level rise


25 means in the shore communities.

133

1 We are already encountering it.

2 We're doing beach replenishment on three year

3 intervals. That's well and fine. We get Federal

4 funding for that. But how much longer do the folks

5 in Nebraska and Iowa are going to want to pay to

6 replenish our beaches. Our flood insurance rates

7 are going through the roof. People now have to

8 elevate their homes. This is not chump change. I

9 haven't done it myself, and we are talking 100,

10 $200,000, to do this. I can't afford it. I can't

11 afford the flood insurance premiums either. A lot

12 of our neighborhoods now are being routinely

13 flooded. This is causing a collapse in property

14 value.

15 What these are, these are all

16 auxiliary costs of burning fossil fuels. It's not

17 just my gas bill I'm paying, I have got to pay for

18 that too. So I will encourage you when you look,

19 and do your equations on what the cost is to burn

20 fossil fuels as an energy source, you look at the

21 entire picture.

22 You know, I listened to your comments

23 in the beginning of the meeting, I understand one of

24 your objectives is energy reliability, another is to


25 produce energy at a reasonable efficient cost. I

134

1 have a possible solution for you. In your Master

2 Plan why don't you do something more to encourage

3 solar energy. We can all generate or own power on

4 the roof of our homes. But we need incentives to do

5 it. You are talking about reliability, well, it's

6 not far from my roof to my circuit breaker. And we

7 all have that ability. We have that capacity. I

8 don't think 20 percent renewable is a nearly

9 aggressive enough goal. You have got to go higher

10 than that, because your Energy Master Plan means a

11 lot to the people that are living in the shore

12 communities that are already feeling the effects of

13 it. And it's equally devastating for a lot of

14 people, and people are moving out. Thank you very

15 much.


17 comments.

18 The next three speakers are, and the

19 name last name is not clear, Bob Filipczak. Zachary

20 Lees and Larry Ferman.

21 MR. FILIPCZAK: My is name Bob

22 Filipczak and I live at 20 Shore Road in Linwood. I

23 definitely consider myself an environmentalist. I

24 love the environment of New Jersey. I have been all


25 through it. I have canoed and camped overnight at

135

1 the Delaware Water Gap. I have sailed a boat from

2 the Walt Whitman Bridge, anchored overnight in Cape

3 May, been out side old Barney over a dozen times,

4 I've fished the lakes, and I go camping in the

5 wintertime time at the Wading River. I also have a

6 little different perspective, because I also am a

7 scientist. I graduated Rutgers New Brunswick in the

8 biological sciences, Drexel University in chemistry

9 and I have worked for 30 years for the Federal

10 Aviation Administration, doing inhalation

11 toxicology, measuring samples. At one time I got

12 DEP licensed to have a tech center lab certificated.

13 So I have got more a bit of more

14 background than a lot of people might. I want to

15 kind of get on the problem of Atlantic City Press

16 being a non-stop propaganda organization for the

17 pipeline.

18 I have a letter to the editor, where

19 it says; Repower Oyster Creek, shut B.L. England.

20 Yet in the article I said, B.L. England plant has

21 caused no particular adverse problems. Its air

22 pollution and control systems are perfectly

23 effective. The plume goes out over the ocean. But

24 the -- so we real don't have a problem at B.L.


25 England, you have monstrous problems at Oyster

136

1 Creek. Oyster Creek nuclear plant is killing

2 Barnigate Bay. They say it produces no water

3 pollution. That is nonsense. It sucks in 6 million

4 gallons of sea water every day. It cooks it and

5 dumps the nitrogen rich slop into the Barnegat Bay.

6 If you want to know why lot of the

7 stinging nettles or jelly fish populating there,

8 it's because they're cleaning up the organic slop

9 that Oyster Creek is routinely dumping. So you have

10 got one really serious environmental problem that

11 the DEP has waived, oh, we are not going to that, we

12 are going permit that to continue until 2019. And

13 then you're closing down B.L. England which is

14 causing no particular adverse effects.

15 Now, B.L. England at one point in

16 time was certainly a dirty plant. I fluked and

17 fished in the shadow of it. However, the state put

18 in air pollution control equipment, they put in

19 scrubbers, mostly they have the cooling towers, so

20 that they stop putting heated water back into the

21 bay. Back that early 60s, all you were catching in

22 the Great Egg inlet was blow fish because they can

23 survive the heated water that's being put in there.

24 You wouldn't see stripper, flounder, anywhere. Now


25 they've largely come back, because you have the

137

1 cooling tower. Now the Oyster Creek doesn't, which

2 is why you have got the environmental problems

3 there.

4 Now, as far as the pipeline

5 reliability project, it's like we have come

6 together, we are allowing you convert from coal to

7 natural gas. It will improve service and

8 reliability. That's a real problem because the

9 problem with the reliability in the electric power

10 grid has been, wind knocking down transmission

11 lines. It's not knocking out the generating

12 capacity of the grid. What's being done is when a

13 really nasty derecho comes through. You have a lot

14 of power outages, because of that. But it's not

15 because the B.L. England is shut down or anything

16 like that.

17 So when they're saying reliable,

18 local source of electricity, that is still already

19 there. Cleaner air, that is not even going to be

20 true. Because the new turbine kind of thing that

21 you are doing, dumps the exhaust gases directly into

22 the air. It runs like a jet engine. There is no

23 pollution control equipment. So you're wasting an

24 800 million dollar cooling tower at B.L. England.


25 You are wasting the plant that really has not caused

138

1 any trouble. Now, you're putting a pipe line

2 through the Pinelands. Now it's suppose to be,

3 yeah, for its reliability. And to help the

4 pinelands. It goes from Millville to B.L. England,

5 which is basically CAFRA, it's tidally washed from

6 the industrial lands. So it's doing nothing for

7 Pinelands. And so you have got a really big problem

8 with that within other thing that I would point out.

9 I'm not in favor of offshore wind

10 generation, which might put me outside some of the

11 environmental community. Now, I fully support the

12 one that's going on outside of Block Island on Rhode

13 Island; because I sailed there. It's a rocky,

14 craggy coast line. It's in deep water, and it's

15 easily transmitted to the island from a short

16 distance. You're going to be putting transmission

17 lines across the ocean, you're going building wind

18 mills out in the ocean.

19 Now South Jersey has got beautiful

20 wide open areas all over the wetlands, exactly where

21 B.L. England is. If you want to put those wind

22 turbines. That's where they should built at the

23 B.L. England site, as auxiliary power generation to

24 improve what's going on there. But transitioning


25 towards clean energy, not continuing to go down the

139

1 road of fossil fuel.

2 Now, the reason I don't really like

3 the wind turbines off the coast of New Jersey, it's

4 shallow, you have got to go out really far, it's a

5 Sandy bottom, the construction costs are going to be

6 pretty ridiculous. And the other problem that in

7 Rhode Island, you have got no major shipping going

8 on there. Off the Atlantic Ocean here, every ship

9 that leaves from New York going to Philadelphia,

10 down to Baltimore to Norfolk runs just off the

11 coast.

12 Now, if a ship loses power and it

13 runs into one of these wind turbines, it's going

14 take down the grid. Who is going to be responsible?

15 The ones that created an obstacle to navigation off

16 of our shore or shipping, or the shipping company

17 that had a power outage. Now there is no reason to

18 put them out in shore when, we have wide open

19 wetlands.

20 We already have demonstration

21 projects going on in Atlantic County Utilities

22 Authority. They're talking about expanding that

23 further. Why not put your solar panels and your

24 wind turbines on land that is already owned by the


25 utilities authority?

140

1 So once, again you're going to be

2 wasting an 800 million dollar cooling tower, you're

3 going to be putting a pipe line through the

4 Pinelands. You are no longer going to any reason

5 for electrical service going to B.L. England, so

6 you're wasting a rail line that goes from Millville

7 to B.L. England. All for what? Because DEP insists

8 that, we have got to shut that down in the name of

9 clean energy. But yet they keep Oyster Creak going,

10 which is, like I said, killing Barnegat Bay. So I

11 urge you to look into exactly who is benefiting from

12 some of this stuff.

13 In fact if you look, the Energy Unit

14 at Revel Drags Down South Jersey Industry. The

15 energy unit at Revel was a gas turbine, just like

16 you're proposing on building on a huge scale. And

17 it's going bankrupt already, because it can't

18 compete on the open market with what's out there

19 now.

20 So you are wasting wonderful assets.

21 You are creating new problems. The pipeline is

22 going to hurt the Pinelands. You're going to

23 continue to commit toward fossil fuels. And I

24 should mention by the way, my house is over a


25 hundred years old. I have got a solar system on my

141

1 roof. I don't pay for energy anymore. Electricity

2 pays for me. I generate twice what I use. I only

3 have 11, three by five panels on my roof. So it's

4 not a big system by any means. So I do have a

5 little bit of technical knowledge on this. And I

6 think you're squandering a wonderful opportunity and

7 wasting millions and millions of public dollars.

8 Thank you.


10 comments. Next person is Zachary Lees. He left.

11 Okay.

12 Larry Ferman.

13 MR. FER: Hi, I represent Popular

14 Logistics a think tank on energy, economics and

15 environment. And thank you.

16 As of December 31, 2014 New Jersey

17 had one and a half gigawatts of solar capacity. And

18 it seems to me that we can reach an RPS of 30

19 percent by 2020 and that would be great. But

20 Scotland had 2.6 gigawatts of renewable capacity by

21 the end of 2007, and 70.3 gigawatts of capacity by

22 the end of 2014. Denmark using renewables meets and

23 exceeds its electricity demand by 40 percent. This

24 should be our goal, your goal, and our goal. 10


25 gigawatts, 140 percent of clean renewable

142

1 electricity by 2030, 300 gigawatts of winds, 300

2 gigawatts of solar, 110 gigawatts of batteries, 1

3 and a half gigawatts of batteries, one and a half

4 gigawatts of bio fuel from agricultural waste, food

5 waste, and sewage.

6 And to talk on micro level for a

7 couple minutes, solar should be 35 percent of our

8 energy capacity. Stockton, Rutgers, Toms River High

9 School, they are solar. And solar schools are

10 great. The plan should call for 2 and a half

11 megawatts, which is a minor amount. But in an

12 attempting a 100 kilowatt solar array on each of New

13 Jersey's roughly 2500 public schools. The taxpayers

14 pay the operate costs for the schools. Solar is

15 competitive and getting cheaper every day. So in

16 the long run, this could save taxpayers money.

17 And while we are at it, the plan

18 should call for and the taxpayers in my opinion

19 should fund 125 megawatts in 50 kilowatts of Tesla

20 power wall batteries or the equivalent on each of

21 those schools; because that would give us emergency

22 shelters, with power in every community in the State

23 of New Jersey. It would harden the grid. It would

24 strengthen our communities. And the gas station


25 guy, the lobbyist for the gasoline industry was

143

1 saying, we need solar. And if you take solar and

2 put them on the canopies of the gas stations and you

3 put the Tesla power wall or the equivalent on the

4 wall, you have emergency generation on these gas

5 stations at a cost far below. And it's not an

6 emergency system, it's an every day system that also

7 works in an emergency.

8 350 sea titans or equivalent at 10

9 megawatts each, would give us three and a half

10 gigawatts of input capacity offshore wind and create

11 artificial reefs, which nuture, fish, birds, whales,

12 fishing and tourism.

13 Utility authorities transform raw

14 sewage into clean water and Methane. A couple of

15 years ago, I was told that the western Monmouth

16 plant in Manalapan, where I live, uses about

17 one-third of the Methane it produces to treat the

18 incoming sewage. Which is a good idea. They don't

19 buy natural gas from a gas company.

20 But they waste two-thirds of the

21 Methane that they produce, because obviously their

22 charter is treat sewage, not to use the Methane. So

23 if they burn the Methane, the excess Methane, which

24 is I think 1,000 cubic feet a day, if they burn that


25 in a capstone micro turbine or the equivalent,

144

1 because I'm not supporting any one individual

2 company. If they burn that in the turbine, it would

3 produce energy, and it would feed electricity into

4 the grid, further hardening the grid, further and

5 additionally strengthening our communities.

6 So your plan should call for turbines

7 at every sewage treatment plant. The externalities,

8 the side effects of 10 gigawatts of clean renewable

9 energy; artificial reefs which nurture, fish, birds

10 whales, dolphins, no toxic waste, no radioactive

11 waste, very little carbon dioxide. And bio fuel

12 from food waste, agricultural waste and sewage is

13 not fossil fuel, and good jobs.

14 Do I was another couple of seconds.

15 PRESIDENT MROZ: I know you are over

16 time but if you can proceed and try to in.

17 MR FERMAN: In December 2012, after

18 the power came back on after Sandy, I started

19 tracking the market price of fossil fuel companies

20 and sustainable energy companies, against the S&P

21 500. It was the sustainable energy companies that I

22 was tracking more than doubled, 43 percent a year.

23 The S&P was up 17 percent a year. And oil was down

24 8.7 percent a year. That is Wall Street, that is


25 not an not investment decision made by people like

145

1 me and these folks out here. That's Wall Street.

2 So any way to close, after meeting

3 these goals of 10 gigawatts of clean energy, you'd

4 the unsung heroes our of futures.

5 PRESIDENT MROZ: I want to make a

6 comment, about the discrepancy in the notice. I

7 want to confirm that the web site for the Energy

8 Master Plan provides that the date was corrected, to

9 confirm that the end of the written comment period

10 is Monday, August 24. And that has been corrected.

11 It is on the web site. It indicates that. That is

12 that date. So I want to clarify, in case there is

13 any lingering concerns or questions.

14 The next person to speak is Ann Kelly

15 Ms. Kelly, if you have an affiliation.

16 MS. KELLY: I'm a citizen. I live in

17 Burlington County. And just and I just wanted to

18 mention that there is nothing natural about natural

19 gas. They extract, fracking gas is a pretty dirty

20 process. I think that smart people have spoken

21 about it.

22 I believe that these pipelines are

23 bad for the planet nation and state. And moving

24 forward with a dirty fossil fuel extraction process


25 such as fracking, only the encourages more

146

1 destruction. And dooms our children and your

2 grandchildren to a dangerous burden.

3 When profits reign over our future

4 and people, we are relegating our children's futures

5 to what may be a scene from a science fiction movie,

6 because no one really know what's going to happen.

7 To continue with this plan would result in a funeral

8 for all of us.

9 Fracking destroys water a precious

10 resource for a private energy company that the

11 ratepayers will pay for through higher rates and

12 insurance costs.

13 There's no going back once you do

14 this. Thank you.


16 comments. The next person is Neil Hutchinson.

17 MR. HUTCHINSON: How are you? My

18 name is Neil Hutchinson. I'm representing the youth

19 of New Jersey.

20 So pretty much, since I have grown up

21 in New Jersey, I have only lived here about 11

22 years, and in that time we have managed to put solar

23 panels on our house, which I did for two summers,

24 putting up 30 some solar panels on our house. Also


25 installing composting toilets throughout our house,

147

1 as well a geothermal heating and cooling. We also

2 have all electric cars. We have no gas cars.

3 And for this just listening to

4 everyone that has went, there seems to be a lot more

5 that I can probably learn from this. But here is

6 some things that I have written down. Instead of a

7 pipeline, we should definitely be going for solar

8 panels. It's -- the sun is literally there for us

9 to take. Why are we not doing that? Wind power

10 it's the wind, it's usually windy. Also fracking,

11 talking about something who is speaking before

12 fracking which goes in to noses and causes

13 Alzheimer's, I wouldn't really want you guys or me

14 to forget my own children, who are going to have to

15 deal with this problem. Also, how could this be

16 possible? If -- it could be an up front cost, but

17 after a while it's there. All you have to do it

18 update solar panels, which are getting better with

19 technology, the way that younger people like myself

20 are innovating these new ways.

21 Also in this, if we keep on doing

22 fracking to create this pipeline. Obviously, the

23 world's temperature, global warming is happening,

24 the sea levels are rising. Then you guys won't be


25 able take your grandchildren to Ocean City beaches

148

1 because there won't be any beaches. It will just be

2 a boardwalk. Let's see what else.

3 And I think I that is all I want to

4 say. But just for all of the young people, there

5 are people that are worried about our state, if this

6 continues you will see a lot of young people not

7 come to New Jersey, but leaving New Jersey for other

8 countries, such as Denmark that does have solar

9 power, also other states like California and New

10 York that have better master plans than we have in

11 front of us right now.


13 comments.

14 The next speaker is Donna Henry. If

15 you have an affiliation or represent some

16 organization, please say so.

17 MS. HENRY: Good afternoon. My name

18 is Donna Henry. I'm a resident of Atlantic County

19 and I'm a mom. And I am here to not just represent

20 myself and people living here now in New Jersey, but

21 future generations.

22 One problem in the Energy Master

23 Plan, it should be addressing renewable energy.

24 Like everybody and the last gentleman mentioned,


25 solar, wind, energy, geothermal. That is the

149

1 future, not continuing to use fossil fuels from an

2 industry that just wants us to use every drop of

3 fossil fuel left, so they can make more and more

4 money, instead of moving to clean energy. We have

5 the ability. What we should be doing is investing

6 research and development money into better fossil

7 fuel-free energy solutions.

8 We should be 100 percent renewable by

9 2050. We were moving in that direction. The 2008

10 goal was 30 percent renewables. The 2011 goal went

11 to 22 percent renewables. We are rolling back our

12 progress. Climate change is real and this Energy

13 Master Plan does not address it. It is not an

14 Energy Master Plan. It's an energy disaster plan.

15 My kids and your kids, if you have,

16 them are going to be left with this mess. It's

17 greedy not to take into consideration future

18 generations. I love New Jersey and I would say most

19 of us do. But what's going to be the love in New

20 Jersey after you have ruined? It you're going lay

21 pipes, you're going to disrupt the environment. As

22 these people mentioned, they are going to get the

23 natural gas from fracking. We have all heard how

24 disastrous that is. Okay. We don't live where they


25 extracting the natural gas. That doesn't mean it's

150

1 not happening for those people. It's really

2 terrible when the people are effected over there.

3 And the people don't pay attention to it. We'd be

4 taking our natural gas from another state where

5 they're ruining the roadways and polluting water.

6 And people that live in Pennsylvania now that are

7 near the fracking, they would tell you all kinds of

8 horror stories. Why? Because people are getting

9 lots of money for their land. Money is trumping

10 integrity, and the right decision. That should

11 never be the case. Money doesn't trump integrity.

12 And this very sad.

13 I'd like to see you do the right

14 thing, but with so much money at stake here. I see

15 a lot of people not doing the right thing. This

16 isn't a decision just about yourselves and power and

17 positions and job -- you know keeping your job.

18 It's much more than that. This is our state too.

19 Thank you.


21 Barbara Miller is the last person who

22 has registered and indicated that she wants to

23 speak.

24 MR. HUTCHINSON: Unfortunately, she


25 walked out, and gave a handwritten statement. She

151

1 is a concerned citizen of Petersburg, New Jersey.

2 PRESIDENT MROZ: Just for the record

3 --

4 MR. HUTCHINSON: Barbara Miller, and

5 I'm Ron Hutchinson, and so here is her statement.

6 It makes sense to diversify our energy portfolio,

7 just as we diversify a financial portfolio. You

8 would think it irresponsible to invest all of your

9 capital in one stock.

10 Even if anyone is skeptical about

11 acclimate change, making a huge investment in one

12 technology, fracked gas seems unwise. Any resources

13 devoted to fossil fuel energy is in fact a very bad

14 investment. If those same resources were devoted to

15 research and development of clean, renewable energy,

16 we might yet have a chance to begin to reverse

17 climate change. We must leave fossil fuels in the

18 earth and not continue the self-destructive,

19 self-deluded pursuit of cheap energy.

20 PRESIDENT MROZ: Thank you for

21 delivering those comments.

22 That is the last of the individuals

23 who have registered and indicated they wanted to

24 make comments. Is there anyone else here who wants


25 to make a comment? If not.

152

1 I want to say two things. The first

2 is; I thank you for your testimony your comments

3 today. Despite what is in some instances either

4 criticism or concern about me, my colleagues, us

5 collectively, or the Board. I take no offense to

6 it. And I appreciate, you have every right to raise

7 your concerns and opinions.

8 And, otherwise, I would again thank

9 you for your involvement and your participation.

10 And we will conclude this hearing. And as I said

11 earlier we will be announcing shortly, both timeline

12 and next steps in the process, if there should be an

13 update.

14 Thank you.

15

16 (Whereupon proceeding adjourned.

17 Time noted: 4:41 p.m.)

18

19

20

21

22

23

24


25

153

1 CERTIFICATE

2

3 I, GERALDINE ADINOLFI, a Certified Court

4 Reporter and Notary Public of the State of New

5 Jersey, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a

6 true and accurate transcript of the testimony as

7 taken stenographically by and before me at the time,

8 place and on the date hereinbefore set forth.

9 I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither a

10 relative nor employee nor attorney nor counsel of

11 any of the parties in this action and that I am

12 neither a relative nor employee of such attorney or

13 counsel, and that I am not financially interested in

14 the action.

15

16 _____________________

17 Certified Court Reporter

18 License No. 30XI00228000

19

20 Notary Public of the State of New Jersey

21 Notary No. 2273630

22 My Commission expires: March 30, 2016

23 Dated: August 17, 2015

24


25